if you don’t want to participate in society, then don’t.

if you want to, then play by the rules the majority agrees on. there are plenty of rules I don’t agree with but follow anyways because that’s the social contract

Libertarians, in general, want to reap the benefits of society without paying the costs. I don’t imagine Amazon would have grown to the size it did if there weren’t ports for the ships to dock in, roads for the trucks to drive on, an internet to advertise on, and all the rest of it, yet they feel beset upon for being asked to pay the taxes that help provide all those things.

Anti-vaxer truckers are the same, but writ small and in human form.

Not sure where I stand on the vaccine thing.

I fully support science and think vaccines should be mandatory, especially during a global pandemic that we haven’t seen in a hundred years. Or, for example, measle vaccines before exposing yourself to others during a measles outbreak.

I’m also for body autonomy with abortion and what medical care and what vaccines you receive.

It cuts both ways.

In the end I think the failing here is education. Not enforcement. IMO most reasonable people would take the vaccine. The only reason reasonable people don’t is because they do not trust government or science, due to lack of education or understanding.

You know what the word “mandatory” means, right? In this one comment you say you’re for mandatory vaccines in exactly the scenario that the convoy morons were whining about but also go off about bodily autonomy. Yes, education is important but also we have regulations and laws because unfortunately we don’t live in a fairy land where everyone behaves themselves and considers the well-being of their fellow person.

It doesn’t cut both ways equally, not by a long shot.

I somewhat agree. But how do you make laws for forcing people to get vaccines, yet let them choose to have abortions, or refuse medical care, or eat garbage food, drink alcohol etc, for example?

Like, how would you define that on a societal level, and also have exceptions for situations the law doesnt account for?

These things dont exactly equate, but I can see why being forced by the government to get a vaccines irks some people. I think it all stems from them thinking that vaccines harm you, or cause autism or whatever. That and that we haven’t had a truly deadly pandemic or disease going around in living memory (thanks again to science and our predecessors getting vaccinated) that would cause people to prefer the vaccine over say polio. People are losing fath in institutions and we are not educating our children with critical thinking enough.

I feel the need to clear the point that the lockdown/restrictions were provincial, and set to expire during those 2 weeks long before the protest was even organized. The public opinion had already turned, and there was no appetite for further restrictions at that point. They cannot take credit for “ending the lockdowns” but unfortunately, the timing and limited awareness make it seem so.

someone’s abort doesn’t kill a strangers kids or grand parents. Come on use your brain or stop being disingenuous.

They had nazi flags. Use your brain.

So, she shouldn’t be working in that field. Her job is to care for others NOT get a nice retirement. Man nurse streo types real.

Lol. She did it exceptionally well for 30 years and there are many children alive today because of her care and YOU’RE going to pass judgement on her? LOL. Oh please.

You’re completely missing context.

At the point of the convoy, about 85% of Canadians were already vaccinated. Thats plenty for ‘herd immunity’ But the government was STILL pushing, after two solid years of vaccinations and people being isolated for even MORE measures to force people to get vaccinated. And the cracks were already beginning to show - kids were losing out on a significant amount of their education, old people in homes were suffering deep depression from not seeing family, businesses were closing and people were losing their life’s work because they had no customers, mental health issues were skyrocketing and hospitals couldnt keep up with the patient intake, drug use went from bad to epidemic levels and still is epidemic level, family relationships were not only strained but a lot of people ended relationships with friends and family over the vaccination issue. And into this hell, Trudeau comes up with the bright idea to try and force cross border truckers to get vaccinated when they barely ever left their truck cabs and interacted with almost no one in their daily duties. Even Trudeau said “over 90% of truckers are vaccinated”. Fine. Good enough, leave the rest alone.

You make it sound like those opposed to vaccines were the majority. No there were a minority who had reasons not to get it whether you agree with their reasons or not. And we should’ve been just fine with that, because they were a small minority. But instead of just leaving them alone MANY people vilified them as evil people and bad Canadians. They weren’t.

I STRONGLY prefer a few people who chose to do what they felt was right for them and their families to a government that says you WILL do what we say, WHEN we tell you to do it and you will NOT object or we will make sure you suffer consequences including losing your job and your means to make a living AND we will seize your money for protesting what we tell you. Like, what the fuck Trudeau, back the hell up!! Who made you KING?! This is Canada, not communist China. He WAY overstepped his authority and thank god he paid for it with HIS job - the truckers are just fine.

If you are given options its a choice like ‘hey we value your THIRTY YEARS of service so you can work on a different unit for now, or you can take an unpaid leave, or you can do administrative work at home til the epidemic subsides’ THAT would be a choice.

If its ‘You have to get the vaccine or we’ll fire you’, thats not a consequence, thats force’ She was most definitely FORCED to resign.

It was her job which she refuses to protect others. Sorry you don’t get points for doing your job.

The only one in there you listed that doesn’t affect only the person making the decision is vaccines. The classic quote is something like “Your freedom to swing your fist ends at someone’s face.”

The other comments put it well in saying that vaccines affect other people. Though, oddly enough, we do need better laws regarding what food can be sold as far as that one goes because companies making sugar-filled, addictive food very much on purpose is an action they take for personal gain that relies on hurting others.

For sure people are losing faith in institutions, and that is largely because of the critical thinking issues you mentioned and also the fact that we can’t help ourselves but elect at least a few untrustworthy people into office. The people who attended the convoy were largely Conservative voters and if they have a problem with the government they’re only going to make it that much worse by putting the scummiest people you know into positions of power.

These also aren’t really problems if you think about them or look to places that have already worked them out.

You really just needed to think an extra 10 minutes before writing this down.

It doesn’t “cut both ways” those are two separate issues: personal health and public health.

If you think seat belts, fluoride in water, warning labels on poison bottles, bittrex in antifreeze are being foisted upon your personal choices, then you need to reconsider that there are other people than you in the world.

It’s not that complicated: get vaccinated so you and others are less likely to die when disease rolls around.

I agree with you, but that is not THEIR perspective. Many of them believe abortion IS murder.

I agree. I’m from Australia, and vaccinations are mandatory and required, like you will be ordered by a court, and have your children removed if they are not vaccinated type of thing. I agree with this law.

I think people downvoting here are not understanding what I’m saying, or I didn’t explain it well enough. I’m not saying anti vaxxers are right. I am saying they have some merit with their arguments, but ultimately they only think these ideas due to lack of education and critical thinking.

What about her employers obligation to protect HER? She was there for 30 years and she had already suffered physical damage from a previous vaccine that her employer required (SARS). To FORCE her to endanger herself further was illogical and unfair.

Its not as absolute as it sounds. While vaccines do have externalities (eg: protection of others via herd immunity), so do the others I mentioned:

Refusing medical care can increase long-term public healthcare costs, especially in countries with socialized medicine, luke Canada

Eating garbage food or drinking excessively leads to chronic disease burdens (obesity, diabetes, liver disease), again impacting public systems and reducing workforce productivity. You could argue that this is mitigate through alcohol tax.

Abortion is more complicated, but opponents would argue there’s another life at stake, so from their moral framework, it’s not purely personal either.

The “freedom ends at someone else’s face” is useful but oversimplified. The real challenge is defining when individual choices cross the line into collective consequences, and which ones merit state intervention. Vaccines are one of the clearest examples, yes, but they’re not the only ones with spillover effects.

So my point is how do you define that line, legally? I think it needs to remain pragmatic. Societies change faster than laws do.