Covid-19 Antivaxxers, extremism and the Coalition

Remove this Banner Ad

It's hard to argue that the far right hasn't infiltrated the anti vax movement when you look at the wing nuts in Canberra flying the flag for them, all in the name of "freedom" of course.

there is no doubt there are some ding bats in the anti vax movement but you'd have to be a ding bat not to recognise freedoms, employment, right to reject medical treatment and discrimination (specifically referring to unlawful discrimination which is well documented) are being threatened unnecessarily

even during a pandemic, the implementation and enforcement of laws must be reasonable
 
there is no doubt there are some ding bats in the anti vax movement but you'd have to be a ding bat not to recognise freedoms, employment, right to reject medical treatment and discrimination (specifically referring to unlawful discrimination which is well documented) are being threatened unnecessarily

even during a pandemic, the implementation and enforcement of laws must be reasonable

lets put this freedom crap into some perspective

when cafes in NSW were banning victorians from entering, you lot thought that was funny

now a cafe doesnt want to allow non vaccinated people in, and they are ending democracy
 
lets put this freedom crap into some perspective

when cafes in NSW were banning victorians from entering, you lot thought that was funny

now a cafe doesnt want to allow non vaccinated people in, and they are ending democracy

Cafes are allowed to discriminate against vaccinated or unvaccinated people under existing laws relating to property and access

What is not appropriate is governments mandating vaccination or employers terminating employees unreasonably


Identifying the issue in a debate is important
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Cafes are allowed to discriminate against vaccinated or unvaccinated people under existing laws relating to property and access

What is not appropriate is governments mandating vaccination or employers terminating employees unreasonably


Identifying the issue in a debate is important

your mates are filming themselves getting rejected from cafes in attempts to trigger outbursts and sympathy

this isnt about govt, its about them wanting to impose a BS anti vax/5g/fluoride/etc agenda

as odd as it is, you're on board the Byron train :)
 
there is no doubt there are some ding bats in the anti vax movement but you'd have to be a ding bat not to recognise freedoms, employment, right to reject medical treatment and discrimination (specifically referring to unlawful discrimination which is well documented) are being threatened unnecessarily

even during a pandemic, the implementation and enforcement of laws must be reasonable
The very moment the “freedom” crew accept some responsibility for their freedom, im happy to acquiesce.

Such as :

Personally accepting the expense of icu treatment if they require it for covid.

Understanding that given a triage situation, they are deprioritised when the choice is between them and an immunised person for an icu / ecmo position thats covid related.

Right now they want to spruik their never ending bs with no concomitant responsibilities or consequences.
 
there is no doubt there are some ding bats in the anti vax movement but you'd have to be a ding bat not to recognise freedoms, employment, right to reject medical treatment and discrimination (specifically referring to unlawful discrimination which is well documented) are being threatened unnecessarily

even during a pandemic, the implementation and enforcement of laws must be reasonable
It's a bunch of children screaming "you can't tell me what to do" being stirred up for political benefit by a bunch of people you'd think would know better. It's not rocket science.
 
The very moment the “freedom” crew accept some responsibility for their freedom, im happy to acquiesce.

Such as :

Personally accepting the expense of icu treatment if they require it for covid.

Understanding that given a triage situation, they are deprioritised when the choice is between them and an immunised person for an icu / ecmo position thats covid related.

Right now they want to spruik their never ending bs with no concomitant responsibilities or consequences.

The word reasonable is important

Personally I advocate no medicare, rather a Pay-As-You-Go, for reckless or negligent behaviour. Have a car accident whilst drunk, you pay. Cop a disease and did not accept a free vaccination, you pay. Cop lung cancer and you smoke, you pay. Cop liver cancer and you drink, you pay.

For as much as I'm pro vax and got vaxxed within two days of being eligible; I also accept that others may not feel so comfortable accepting a vax that has not been provided approval other than emergency use. I also accept there are some that will not get vaxxed for any reason.


I feel there are better ways to encourage high vaccination rates without resorting to divisive politics, discrimination, unreasonable demands, breaches of privacy and breaches of medical in confidence.

In our work place where we do have offices and remote camps we are very much focused on safety which includes drugs, alcohol, vaccination and general safety. We get results through policies based on culture which requires positive investment and education.

Lowering ones standards to exile, termination of employment, discrimination and demonising is pathetic. I think many have lost sight we are attacking healthy people just because they don't share our beliefs.
 
Last edited:
It's a bunch of children screaming "you can't tell me what to do" being stirred up for political benefit by a bunch of people you'd think would know better. It's not rocket science.

that is the way a nutbag would look at the issue.

A reasonable person would ask "is it reasonable, to terminate one's employment despite being perfectly healthy?" "despite not evidence of any benefit to patients, by vaccinating health workers from influenza (a disease that spreads in a similar manner - and as they are more likely to turn up to work sick as they don't have symptoms)".

I'd suggest the words "being reasonable" apply to all parties. Please be reasonable and get vaccinated. Please be reasonable as an employer and as a society to recognise people's rights to not be forced to have "non-consensual medical treatment"


I'd suggest there are better ways and proven ways to increase vaccination rates, rather than nutbag solutions that are unreasonable.
 
that is the way a nutbag would look at the issue.

A reasonable person would ask "is it reasonable, to terminate one's employment despite being perfectly healthy?" "despite not evidence of any benefit to patients, by vaccinating health workers from influenza (a disease that spreads in a similar manner - and as they are more likely to turn up to work sick as they don't have symptoms)".

I'd suggest the words "being reasonable" apply to all parties. Please be reasonable and get vaccinated. Please be reasonable as an employer and as a society to recognise people's rights to not be forced to have "non-consensual medical treatment"


I'd suggest there are better ways and proven ways to increase vaccination rates, rather than nutbag solutions that are unreasonable.

heres the counter

If my client insists upon everyone being double vaxxed to go onsite, do I have to pay someone a full time wage who can no longer do the job they were hired for because they cannot go onsite?

its firms driving this, not govt
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

heres the counter

If my client insists upon everyone being double vaxxed to go onsite, do I have to pay someone a full time wage who can no longer do the job they were hired for because they cannot go onsite?

its firms driving this, not govt

Firstly is their demand reasonable?

it is no different to women getting pregnant, it is an inconvenience but one has to be reasonable and consider the legal implications if not
 
Firstly is their demand reasonable?

it is no different to women getting pregnant, it is an inconvenience but one has to be reasonable and consider the legal implications if not

yes. if they get infections on site they have to shut down, and most are rated essential services.

so again, you think i should have to pay someone to not do the job they were paid to, as no client will accept them onsite?
 
yes. if they get infections on site they have to shut down, and most are rated essential services.

so again, you think i should have to pay someone to not do the job they were paid to, as no client will accept them onsite?

I think you know the answer to the question given the word "reasonable"
 
I think you know the answer to the question given the word "reasonable"

so who decides this? the market is currently doing it, but you want that overturned. do you want the govt to mandate which firms can prohibit access and which cannot?
 
so who decides this? the market is currently doing it, but you want that overturned. do you want the govt to mandate which firms can prohibit access and which cannot?

the market does not decide this. We have separation between our executive arm of government and the judicial arm of government to stop the market aka the dumb masses "from deciding this"

and no I don't believe governments should mandate. Rather we have existing laws that can deal with this.

So who decides? the employer initially and ultimately a judge if employees feel it is unreasonable. The property owner decides this.

Hopefully most will be reasonable and considered in their decision making.
 
the market does not decide this. We have separation between our executive arm of government and the judicial arm of government to stop the market aka the dumb masses "from deciding this"

and no I don't believe governments should mandate. Rather we have existing laws that can deal with this.

So who decides? the employer initially and ultimately a judge if employees feel it is unreasonable. The property owner decides this.

Hopefully most will be reasonable and considered in their decision making.

its not govt that mandated this. i can tell you right now, i received directives from some of australias largest firms on this before vaccine mandates were even being discussed by govt

sadly my inbox is full of these emails

this was driven not by appeasing govt, but wanting to avoid shutdowns (even if its just losing staff)
 
Firstly is their demand reasonable?

it is no different to women getting pregnant, it is an inconvenience but one has to be reasonable and consider the legal implications if not
Did you.....

Did you just compare paid maternity leave to someone refusing to get vaccinated having a right to pay?

Like straight after you went all neolibral on public health care?
 
Did you.....

Did you just compare paid maternity leave to someone refusing to get vaccinated having a right to pay?

Like straight after you went all neolibral on public health care?

no

I said "it is no different to women getting pregnant, it is an inconvenience but one has to be reasonable and consider the legal implications if not "


now start again with your emotive cry but this time try and get the facts, context and the issue at hand correct
 
no

I said "it is no different to women getting pregnant, it is an inconvenience but one has to be reasonable and consider the legal implications if not "


now start again with your emotive cry but this time try and get the facts, context and the issue at hand correct
* I'm sick of antivaxxers co opting womens body autonomy
 
Like straight after you went all neolibral on public health care?

oh and private health insurance is more appropriate than medicare for the situation of negligent and reckless behaviour. With the right of medicare, should come responsibility. If you don't accept a "free" and "freely available" vax, then one should cover the costs associated with that disease.

It is no big leap from the concept that medicare covers you in Oz (and limited places overseas) but private health is required if you engage in overseas holidays.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top