Sorry that you seem to disapprove.
I don't segregate and toss a friend aside because they "may" be contagious. And if they "are" contagious, my concern for them will lead me to help them-that, and they will know that I do care for them even if we decide not to be next to each other. I mean, when I have a cold, I don't cough in my friend's face, but I definitely won't segregate her.
That's horrible. I mean, if you were married, I'd be shocked if you kicked your husband or wife out because she could be contagious without being vaccinated.
I don't agree with segregation.
No, it's not: "Coercion - the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats."
Yes. It's coercion. You're saying that if someone doesn't get vaccinated, they should lose their job. So, its persuasion by guilt and loosing the job is a consequence if they don't want to be guilty for not following the majority of vaccinated people.
Force by persuasion and threats by taking people's jobs unless they comply.
I wrote, "you are not free of the consequences of your decision, which may cost you friends, your job, and/or your life." There is no force exerted and no threat. You are free to choose your path. Find friends and a job that agree with your choices. How is your position different from, "I can do whatever I want without regard for the people around me, but they can't do what they want - they also have to do what I want, or they are coercing me?"
Please answer that. If you convince me that I am being unfair, I'll modify my position accordingly, which is, that we can show mutual concern about the needs of the other, or you do as you like and so will I.
"you are not free of the consequences of your decision, which may cost you friends, your job, and/or your life."
"I can do whatever I want without regard for the people around me, but they can't do what they want - they also have to do what I want, or they are coercing me?"
What's the difference?
Big one. The first doesn't mention the type of consequences. It's "assumed" consequences. It doesn't say one doesn't care about other people-that's your assertion of consequence but not a fact.
Some people say "I believe I can do whatever I want" but I assume the majority of unvaccinated people are indifferent. Just don't accuse them of not caring about people.
Provaxxers, media, politics, are using coercion.
I just picked the first one I saw. It's all on Youtube and on google. I rarely see the other way around. Confirmation bias.
It's horrible that a group of vaccinated people don't want to be with the unvaccinated?
I also don't want to be around people that are coughing for the same reason. Our bridge club asks people that are coughing to stay home. Is that also horrible to you?
No. Who said that???
The two are different. You "know" the person is sick when he or she coughs. So that makes sense. You don't know who has COVID-so your fear or concern-etc-makes you think every unvaccinated person is contagious.
I rather know the facts and stay away than stay away off of a probability.
I'll bet they don't want to be around infectious people. My friends wouldn't come to me knowing they have a contagious disease, and if one did, he probably wouldn't be a friend after that. I can't imagine why I would want such a person in my life any longer.
But we're talking about probabilities not actualities.
Not many people will be around others who they KNOW are affected. However, they won't send them too the wolves and segregate them. That's terrible.
Of course, my situation may be atypical. My entire social structure is other retired expats, and my days are free to spend as I like. Twenty to forty friends is all I have room for anyway, and it is not hard to find that many people that share my worldview and values. When I was younger, I benefited from a broad exposure, even to people that I would later learn I am better off without. You know, like the guy who attacks you passive-aggressively and then says he was kidding and "can't you take a joke?" Gas lighters are unwelcome, as are people that can never be on time, people who steal from you or borrow without returning things, and more. You learn about these people early in life, and how to identify and avoid them. Then you do that.
In this case you're judging complete strangers just because they say they are unvaccinated. That's different than actually knowing someone you distrust or know the context of a situation to avoid people who harm you.
I mean, if I knew someone intended to harm me, I'd stay away. Not because they are unvaccinated, but because I know them personally. If a stranger said he wasn't vaccinated, I wouldn't care. If they had a gun, that's when I care. I don't know if he has COVID and won't judge him just because thousands of people died in another town. But if he had a gun, that's a different story.
At this stage in life, I have no interest in sampling humanity further. I know what I want and don't want. I want people that are well-read, educated, liberal, not steeped in religion, not alcoholics or drug addicts, have a wide assortment of interests and expertises, a good sense of humor, ideally are well-traveled and are volunteers, are kind, love animals, respect the environment, are responsible, polite, clean, honest, thoughtful, have a pleasant disposition, etc..
That's fine. You're judging strangers solely because they are unvaccinated.
To put it bluntly, it sounds like the issue is yours not theirs. People can think things true in their mind-cognitive distortion-and base their lives and opinions off of assumptions and realize they are wrong no matter how much their assumptions they think are true.
It's not hard to find such people where I live. After all, we're the people who moved to another country and culture. Such people tend to fit that description better than those we left behind, so we met more of them. So, if you prefer spending time with such people, and you can limit your personal relationships to just them, why wouldn't you?
If I were in your place, yes. I would. But not because they are unvaccinated. More if they pose a danger to my well-being. I don't go off of possibilities unless the risk is high enough to assume there is one.
But many others do. If I'm right about that, and I know I am based on the opinions I'm hearing from the vaccinated, isn't it in your interest to know that rather than focusing on how you think things should be or prefer they be?
I hear both sides and choose not to vaccinated. That's how people make decisions. They research and listen to both sides hopefully without confirmation bias.
I don't. They're free to do whatever lawful thing they like, as are those around them. Are people that choose not to bathe and are shunned for that victims of anybody but themselves? How is this different? One doesn't have to care about what the people around him expect from them, but if he doesn't, his claims of victimhood fall on deaf ears. It's always been that way and likely always will be.
I don't see that as the same. Instead, it's assuming person X has not bathed and treating him based on that assumption and not facts.
Do you mean exclude them from my life? They can go wherever they are accepted. Perhaps these people I mentioned earlier should start a dinner club with people that share their beliefs and values.
No. Just where should unvaccinated people go? An island on their own? Back of the bus? Trail of tears?
Just your opinion of where to put unvaccinated people.
