[II2II]

> Furthermore, it can be effectively argued that forcing workers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs is inherently discriminatory and perhaps even anti-freedom.

From my understanding, this is only the case for truckers crossing the border. Most of the vaccination mandates I have heard of have been at the provincial or municipal levels and only affect employees of the government or publicly controlled institutions (health, education, police). Even then, it is typically on unpaid leave. Relatively few mandates have come from Ottawa, simply because it isn't their jurisdiction. They aren't leaving much room for human rights complaints, particularly since I believe employers were already within their rights to demand certain vaccinations. I very much doubt that it would even qualify as discriminatory, since it does not affect protected classes.

[glennvtx]

It is not the employers that are demanding these people be vaccinated, They just want their products delivered. The government wont allow drivers to cross an imaginary line without submitting to vaccination: an even more egregious trespass of an individuals liberty than their usual practice of extortion and/or delay.

[sudosysgen]

If by imaginary line you mean an international border and by government you mean the US government, at least the first part is factual.

As for the second part, the US has been asking for a whole host of vaccinations in order to get a visa for multiple decades, same for the Canadian one, so I don't see how it's "an even more egregious trespass of an individuals liberty than their usual practice".

[Teever]

Do you actually think that referring to borders as 'imaginary lines' is productive? Like do you think that it ads to the conversation, or persuades people to agree with you?

Why do you do it?