mandatory injection of substances in your body without one's consent is the textbook definition of authoritarianism. Not the first time it happened in History.
In France 11 vaccines are mandatory by law for children, starting soon after birth.
The number of people who have a problem with that is minuscule and infinitely smaller than the number of people who have a problem with Covid vaccines, which are not mandatory. To me this highlights the high degree of irrationality and of misplaced "fight for freedom" we're seeing.
This is a dishonest comparison because 1) most of those other vaccines are much more effective to the point of being sterilising, flawless and/or lasting a lifetime and 2) they all have been tested to hell and back.
It's not really voluntary - you are excluded from lots of society by law that you previously didn't had access to if you don't do it (for instance you are no longer legally allowed to visit restaurants, museums etc).
At the very least it's highly coercive. (I personally am vaccinated, think everyone should get themselves vaccinated, and am against 'vaccination passports').
> So it is voluntary. People just dont like the consequences of their actions.
Voluntary is doing something by your own free will, which to me doesn't mean "there are legal consequences / you will be banned from your current way of living if you don't do it".
For instance, if you had to register as an organ donor otherwise you could never eat at a restaurant at any time in your life, I doubt we would call that registration 'completely voluntary'.
But I think this just comes down to a definition of what you count as voluntary, and if something can be truly voluntary if people are actually doing it because of coercion. It depends where you stop, if we fine people if they don't take a vaccine does that still count as voluntary, just because there are consequences to their actions? What if we put people in jail? Where is the line between something being voluntary and being coerced?
> These are required when visiting certain countries where you are expected to be vaccinated against certain diseases. Also for citizenship in most places (TB vaccine + scan of lungs, all other expected vaccines...)
To clarify I'm talking about domestic 'vaccine passports'. The word in the UK at least is used to describe the introduction of proving your identification and vaccination status every time you go into a restaurant or bar within the country etc as they have introduced in France, which also keeps a log of everywhere every citizen has visited.
If any country wants to block anyone from entering their country without a particular vaccination then that's fine and their decision.
> So its merely adding a new vaccine to the already existing lists.
First, it's not a vaccine like the other ones, since the infection still spreads among vaccinated people. It does not sterilize the virus at all. It simply protects YOU, and only you, from the worst effects.
Second, why stop at vaccines then? Let's have passports for everything under the sun like China with their social score, and let's remove any kind of individual rights and submit to our dear leader(s) since they know what is best for everyone, even though this virus only kills people with at least 3-4 comorbidities. Let the ones most at risk get the shot, and the rest can decide for themselves. It's only a crisis because we are calling it one.
The number of people who have a problem with that is minuscule and infinitely smaller than the number of people who have a problem with Covid vaccines, which are not mandatory. To me this highlights the high degree of irrationality and of misplaced "fight for freedom" we're seeing.