When it comes to COVID vaccine requirements, it’s one thing for a company to require proof of vaccination. As annoying as that is, you can choose to say ” nope, I’m good, I’ll take my business elsewhere.” It’s something quite different when government is running it and especially requiring it
Switzerland to Start Implementing EU COVID-19 Passport System on June 7
Under the Federal Office of Information Technology, Systems and Telecommunication (FOITT) solution, Switzerland has announced the implementation of the COVID-19 certificate system, which will be effective immediately and running until the end of June 2021.
During the pilot phase, which is set to start on June 7, Swiss cantons will be issued gradually with the first digital certificates, SchengenVisaInfo.com reports.
Starting on June 1, seven EU countries – Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Croatia and Poland have started to implement the COVID-19 passport. Other countries are set to launch the document once all functions are operating and it is recognised widely.
The gateway will operate as a verification tool for the COVID-19 passport issued by the EU, which aims to revive travelling within the block. Since May 10, 22 countries have successfully tested the COVID-19 passport gateway.
Since it is set to provide a high level of security, Switzerland’s system will be subjected to a broad public security test. This means that besides the security analyses conducted by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), the security system will also be tested by public security experts and other authorities regarding the field.
That should work out well. Another article on this EU passport system notes
The gateway, which has been set up within a period of two months, will serve as a verification tool for the EU COVID-19 certificates, through which the EU intends to restore the freedom of movement within the block.
These are the same types of political people who lose their minds over illegal aliens showing their papers, and, government requiring that one gets the shot or have had COVID and have the antibodies is the antithesis of freedom of movement
New York’s ‘Excelsior Pass’ is United States’ first COVID-19 vaccine passport
On the Upper East Side in Manhattan, a well-heeled crowd flashed it to get into a socially distanced dance performance at the Park Avenue Armory. In Chelsea, people showed it to attend a John Mulaney stand-up set at City Winery. And in Troy, New York, patrons are using it to enter an intimate, speakeasy-style bar that admits only vaccinated guests.
This magic ticket is New York state’s Excelsior Pass, which was introduced in March as the first and only government-issued vaccine passport in the country, accessible, for now, only to people who have been vaccinated in the state.
Officials are hoping that it can help New Yorkers feel confident about the safety of businesses and jump-start a statewide economy that is still reeling from losses experienced during the pandemic. But for that to happen, they will need more people and businesses to start using it and vaccine passports to become more universally accepted.
Though it is basically just a QR code on your phone that indicates your vaccine status, the pass, and vaccine passports more generally, have become a political flashpoint among conservatives who say the passports violate privacy concerns.
So, I guess only Conservatives worry about privacy concerns, as well as creating an exclusionary system which leaves those who haven’t had the vaccine out in the wilderness. As far as I can ascertain, this passport doesn’t include those who have had COVID and have the antibodies.
Britain plans to scrap their COVID passport (at least for the moment), while India plans on implementing one for international travel (which at least makes some sense, as opposed to making one for everything). The US state of Georgia has prohibited the creation and use of passports. When members of the Credentialed Media start yapping about using them being for the “public good“, be concerned.
(Tyler Morning Telegraph) Such a [COVID passport] law in a country that respects citizens’ right to set their own health care course would be a concerning shift in direction. It would represent a government intrusion into an area of personal privacy that would, at the very least, result in legal challenge. The inevitable conflict that would be stoked by such a measure would distract, ultimately, from the prize of herd immunity.
Likewise, a vaccine passport — a shorthand way of describing a requirement for proof of vaccination — comes very close to a vaccine mandate if any such “passport” were to be required by government. A passport mandate for admission or participation is akin to a vaccination mandate. As such, government should not enshrine any government mandate for a vaccine passport.
Tucker Carlson: COVID passport could be just the beginning
‘Why can’t they do the same to people with HIV or tuberculosis, or Hepatitis C?’If you’re a middle-aged American, you can probably still dimly remember back to what things used to be like in this country, say, 13 or 14 months ago. Way back then, before the revolution, pretty much everybody agreed that segregation was the worst thing this country ever did. Forcing certain categories of citizens into separate, lesser accommodations, barring them from public places, treating them like lepers or untouchables — that was completely immoral and wrong, we were told that a lot and most of us strongly agreed. It was wrong.
So imagine our confusion today looking out across the country now. The very same people who just the other day told us that segregation was wrong are now enforcing segregation. (snip)
The New York Times informed us that unless you can prove you’ve taken the injection the Democratic Party demands you take, you are no longer permitted in bars, comedy clubs, or even some dance competitions in the state of New York. You’re too dirty to appear in public. You’re not welcome near normal people. Want to watch the NBA playoffs in person? You’d better be vaccinated.
Get the shot, you’re good. If not, you’re Evil. Right? More below the fold
It’s easy. It’s got a QR code. Just send a copy of your vaccination card. Just show your papers, and you can participate in the life of your country. In New York, the state is doing this itself, by issuing something called the “Excelsior Pass.”
The Excelsior Pass entitles you to all the rights and freedoms you imagined you were born with, but that turns out to be entirely contingent on whether you do exactly what Andrew Cuomo says to do immediately. Officials in New York have assured us the Excelsior Pass is totally safe – every bit as safe as a state-licensed nursing home – and it’s totally confidential. Your personal health information cannot be hacked by anyone — apart of course from hackers, people who actually try to hack it. Last month, a man called Albert Fox Cahn broke into the Excelsior Pass in just eleven minutes. But other than that, you’re completely fine. So more than a million people have downloaded the Excelsior pass so far. A victory for public health.
But it does make you wonder: is this the end, or is it the beginning? Whys should it end here? The coronavirus is transmissible, and it can be dangerous. But it’s hardly the only illness that fits that description, there are many. If politicians can segregate potential COVID carriers from the rest of the population, why can’t they do the same to people with HIV or tuberculosis or Hepatitis C? Before you laugh off the possibility of that happening, see if you can answer the question: why wouldn’t that it happen?
And that is the concern, that this COVID passport starts being required for all sorts of different things, and that all your private information can be hacked. That it will be required long term for lots and lots of things.
Overlooking that William Teach is citing Tucker Carlson…
When a transmitted disease kills 550,000 Americans in a year and results in a national recession perhaps we should consider a national policy on stopping the spread. Colds, flu, HIV, TB or Hep C don’t qualify.
Heart disease and cancer each kill over 550,000 Americans a year but are not contagious.
A terrorist attack in 2001 killed only 3000 Americans and changed the way we all live, driving legislation tracking bank transactions, warrantless surveillance, 18 USC § 2339 criminalized giving “material support†to terrorists, to include “expert advice or assistanceâ€, US customs can search travelers papers, phones and laptops without limit, indefinite detention of enemy combatants (1/06 insurrectionists??), torture of detainees, surveillance of American Muslims…
The distinguished Mr Dowd wrote:
Do you find anything Mr Carlson said which you believe to be false?
It resulted in a national recession because the government reacted with fear! The government taught fear, spread fear, encouraged fear!
We’ve already seen the results: mask mandates didn’t work at reducing the spread of COVID-19, but did work in spreading fear.
What, I have to ask, is your threshold number of cases for deciding that we need “a national policy on stopping the spread”? After all, COVID-19 was fatal in only a limited percentage of cases, but, for many years, HIV was a death sentence, and even after the development of retrovirals, HIV remains a lifelong sentence of an expensive medication regime.
Well, that’s true enough: we greatly overreacted to the September 11 attacks as far as the restrictions placed on our liberties, and those things need to be addressed.
Some things, like “indefinite detention of enemy combatants” can be done, because they are done outside of the United States, and are thus not under our legal jurisdiction. That said, I would not detain them indefinitely, but put them on a nice boat back to the Middle East.
And then sink the boat.
It ought to be a maxim: never take anyone prisoner whom you are not willing to ever see released.
Dana: Do you find anything Mr Carlson said which you believe to be false?
In the McDougal case, Fox News argued and the court found that, given Carlson’s reputation, a reasonable person would be skeptical about anything he says.
Z,
So?
Why don’t you provide the rest of the opinion to show context.
We get it. Someone told you are smart, mamas do that, it means nothing. Then you are a budding lawyer, but have little idea of what a lawyer does. Then you desire rebuttal for your debate, consider going to a liberal site and see how long they allow you to have contrarian opinions.
david7134: … context …
Here ya go (McDougal v. Fox News Network):
That makes sense, since Carlson’s show is based on him telling people to be skeptical about what they hear on the news. Anyone who takes him literally would naturally be skeptical of him too. Skepticism is not opposition. It is merely the first steps in gathering information to make informed decisions. Carlson himself would tell you the same and he would expect you to be skeptical.
Professor Hale: Skepticism is not opposition.
The argument was that Carlson was engaged in “non-literal commentary.” Because his credibility is so low, his statements are not actionable.
“550,000 Americans dead…â€. Of course, according to CDC statistics, only about 5% of those that died passed away solely from Covid. That would bring the total down to a very scary 27,500 that died solely from the disease.
The numbers associated with the COVID are grossly inflated. The real mortality and morbidity will never be known. In my state with a oh so great governor we had 42 year old men dying from COVID with massive MI as the secondary diagnosis, no viral symptoms.
The the Dems did everything possible to maximize the impact of this minor virus. Business shut down, sick people housed with elderly, restriction of medication use. This was / is a crime.
doogie hoser DC claims “The the Dems” are all powerful and persuaded every government on Earth to fake the data on Covid deaths.
How does “Dr” hoser explain the “excess deaths” in the US in 2020?
If you wish to argue that all the 550,000 would have eventually died you would be correct. Everyone dies, but in 2020 100s of thousand more Americans died than expected. We know, we know, every statistic with which you disagree is “fake data”.
Jeff,
I just can’t respond in a few statements to abject stupidity, ignorance, and distortion. Read some books, go to class, try and get more than a remedial education, not too late.
Meaning only 27,500 of those “excess deaths†were solely from covid.
david7134: The numbers associated with the COVID are grossly inflated.
Excess deaths support the COVID-19 mortality count.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/figures/mm7015a4-F.gif
I like this. The guy I just shot and killed died with a bullet, not from a bullet.
I’ve said it before: any business that wants to see my vaccination certificate will not get my business. F(ornicate) them!
Our vacation to Europe got cancelled in 2020, but Mrs Pico still wants to go next year. If the European nations are going to require vaccine passports, f(ornicate) them, I will not go; I’ll spend my money in the United States.
We’re certain you’ll be missed on account of your virtue signalling.
Standing up for our rights is not virtue signaling,
Kroger, the nation’s largest grocery store chain, stated on May 13th, when the CDC changed its guidance on mandatory face mask usage, that it didn’t matter to the company; face masks would remain a requirement in their stores.
Well, I guess that Kroger heard from their customers, including a couple of tweets from me, stating that we were doing our grocery shopping an Meijer’s rather than Kroger, because Meijer’s didn’t require masks any longer. On May 19th, Kroger reversed itself, and went along with the guidance that face masks were no longer required for “fully vaccinated” people. That was the same sign Meijer’s had on their doors, but, of course, there was no one inside asking to see your vaccination records, or even just asking if you had been vaccinated. I’ll bet Kroger handles it the same way.
Dana: Standing up for our rights is not virtue signaling,
Being a possible source of contagion is not a right under common law or U.S. statutory law.
Dana: That was the same sign Meijer’s had on their doors, but, of course, there was no one inside asking to see your vaccination records, or even just asking if you had been vaccinated.
So do you violate the private property rights of the business by entering unvaccinated without a mask? Is this something people should do?
Christian bakers of wedding cakes will be happy to hear that you are now in favor of their private property rights.
You don’t impose restrictions on healthy people, because they might have covid. Just like you don’t throw people in jail, because they might commit a crime.
If you are someone with health issues and/or overweight, it is on you to protect yourself and avoid places/events you feel are not safe, because of covid. The point of a free country is that you get to weigh the risks of your actions, not the government. Then you choose what you will do, but it is all on you, your actions.
On a side note, do your own research on covid. Look at the case and death data for countries. Then consider their populations and city densities. You can find all this information online.
At some point, it should become apparent that the USA’s numbers have to be inflated. Just like Dr. Birx said last April, the US is counting covid deaths different from other countries.
We legally impose restrictions of healthy Americans all the time. For example, school policies mandate vaccinations for communicable diseases.
Far-right Missouri requires: DTaP/DTP/DT, Tdap, MCV (Meningococcal Conjugate), IPV (Polio), MMR, Hepatitis B, Varicella for school children.
Declaring Public Health emergencies is a legitimate responsibility of government, where suppression of personal rights can be temporarily over-riden by emergency circumstances. This happens often in catastrophes such as tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and wildfires. And yes, pandemics.
Zoning laws prevent one from operating goat farms, abattoirs, liquor stores, drug rehab facilities, strip clubs next door.
Professor hale: Christian bakers of wedding cakes will be happy to hear that you are now in favor of their private property rights.
We have always supported the right to property as a bedrock of liberty, however, all rights have limitations, such taxation with representation, and laws against racial discrimination in public accommodations.
crow_revenblade: You don’t impose restrictions on healthy people, because they might have covid.
That’s standard procedure. The very notion of quarantine comes from isolating ships in harbor for forty days even if there is no evidence of infection on the ship. George Washington forced the entire Continental Army to be inoculated with live smallpox, with a very real chance of death from the inoculation. Families and even towns were isolated when there were signs of infection, even if individuals didn’t have symptoms. There are countless examples. Both common law and statute law grant government broad powers to control epidemics.
crow_revenblade: At some point, it should become apparent that the USA’s numbers have to be inflated.
Excess deaths support the COVID-19 mortality count.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/figures/mm7015a4-F.gif
We have always supported the right to property as a bedrock of liberty, however…
Excellent. It is good to be flexible on your bedrock values. You never know when you need to change them for political expediency.
Heh!
Bwaha! Lolgf
Professor Hale: Excellent. It is good to be flexible on your bedrock values. You never know when you need to change them for political expediency.
All rights have limitations. Free speech protections do not include falsely yelling “Fire!” in a crowded theater, for instance.
In any case, you ignored the questions: So do you violate the private property rights of the business by entering unvaccinated without a mask? Is this something people should do?
Why would I answer a rhetorical question?
Hint: Don’t answer that.
Professor Hale: Why would I answer a rhetorical question?
It was not a rhetorical question, but concerns the matter of discussion. Does the government have the power to pass a regulation that requires sanitation in public restaurants? Do property owners have a right to refuse service to people who don’t wear clothes? If private property owners institute an honor system, should people surreptitiously violate the honor system?
So tell me, why do you hate manatees?
Ok, I’ll need my overly pedantic rifle for this one. When you ask a question for which most reasonable people already know the answer, because it is a matter of established law, you are asking a question where the answer is not required because the question itself gets your point across. Thus, the question is rhetorical.
Thus, “does the government have the power…” questions have a definite answer established in every jurisdiction I am away of, though many jurisdictions are more or less draconian in their application. But they do indeed have the power and exercise it daily. It is not a matter for debate. If you instead ask “should government have the power…” or even “how much power ought…”, then you are opening a matter for discussion. It might even be a legitimate question if you really didn’t know the answer or needed specific information for my locality.
Your questions were rhetorical. I don’t need to answer them to see the point you were trying to make and you don’t need to wait for my answers to know you are inflexible on your hatred of Trump, though somewhat more flexible on your support of free speech and property rights.
Professor Hale: When you ask a question for which most reasonable people already know the answer, because it is a matter of established law, you are asking a question where the answer is not required because the question itself gets your point across.
A question about what you *should* do, and what the law requires are not always one and the same. So, from your answer, if you are unvaccinated, you would wear a mask or avoid the situation.
Professor Hale: If you instead ask “should government have the power…â€
You seem to prefer avoiding a discussion. We will attempt some answers:
* Does the government have a {legitimate} power to pass a regulation that requires sanitation in public restaurants? Yes.
* Do public accommodations have a right to refuse service to people who don’t wear clothes? Yes.
* If private property owners institute an honor system, should people surreptitiously violate the honor system? No.
See how easy that was.
It seems your interpretations of law are still under dispute. But property owners do not have an absolute right to mandate clothing. Nor may private businesses act as if they are governments and enact legally binding restrictions on customers. Ridiculous demands that cannot be enforced may be ignored. This is why the mask is so important to the mask zealots. It is easily observed.
SO answers are:
Yes, maybe, and maybe.
Non-rhetorical question: Should immunity from a disease be a legitimate excuse to not get a vaccination?
Professor Hale: But property owners do not have an absolute right to mandate clothing.
Good. Then we agree that property rights are sometimes limited. Notably, you cited a case from anti-discrimination law, which we had already mentioned above. So much for your original point above.
Professor Hale: Nor may private businesses act as if they are governments and enact legally binding restrictions on customers.
Generally, businesses have wide latitude unless it falls afoul of specific laws, such as those against discrimination.
Professor Hale: Ridiculous demands that cannot be enforced may be ignored.
So now you are suggesting you *would* violate the honor policy of a business concerning masks.
Professor Hale: Should immunity from a disease be a legitimate excuse to not get a vaccination?
No one is required to get a vaccine, but the medical community recommends vaccination even for those who have recovered from COVID-19.
Pedantic rifle
Prof,
Are you aware that the z’s are a high school level debate clubs? Like all of the brain washed children it is useless trying to exchange meaningful comments.
I believe you are correct. I was indulging Zac only because he was not as verbally abusive or ADHD as Jeff and John.
Rhetorical question #1: should private businesses be permitted to practice medicine on their customers by demanding customers receive treatments that are not indicated and when those businesses have no medical training, medical purpose or credentials to operate as a medical facility by their state?
Rhetorical question Number 2: Should private businesses be exempt from laws that protect the medical privacy of their customers?
Rhetorical question #3: Should private businesses act on behalf of members of the US government to do those things that would not be allowed if the government tried to do them?
No need to answer. My rhetorical questions are rhetorical. I already know the answers.
Not so rhetorical questions:
Professor hale: Rhetorical question #1: should private businesses be permitted to practice medicine on their customers by demanding customers receive treatments that are not indicated and when those businesses have no medical training, medical purpose or credentials to operate as a medical facility by their state?
The CDC recommends people who have not been vaccinated to wear masks in public. It is reasonable for businesses to follow these guidelines.
Professor hale: Rhetorical question Number 2: Should private businesses be exempt from laws that protect the medical privacy of their customers?
Medical privacy laws are not applicable outside a medical setting.
Professor hale: Rhetorical question #3: Should private businesses act on behalf of members of the US government to do those things that would not be allowed if the government tried to do them?
Businesses do all sorts of things government doesn’t do. That’s rather the point of the market system.
Re #1. The CDC never recommended that businesses create medical enforcement regimes on their customers. Hint: That would be illegal.
Re #2. Russian hackers thank you for your support. Focus on the Family thanks you for your support undermining Roe V Wade.
Re #3. Nigerian Princes thank you for your support. The KKK thanks you for your support.
Funny how the Kiddiez use all kinds of logical fallacies and outright dishonesty to troll the willing.
Bwaha! Lolgf
Professor Hale: Re #1. The CDC never recommended that businesses create medical enforcement regimes on their customers. Hale: Re #1. The CDC never recommended that businesses create medical enforcement regimes on their customers.
The CDC recommends. States and localities can institute mandates. Businesses can set their own policies as long as they meet the minimal legal requirement.
Professor Hale: Re #2. Russian hackers thank you for your support.
Hacking is a federal crime. Asking someone to wear a mask if they are not vaccinated is not.
Professor Hale: Re #3. Nigerian Princes thank you for your support.
Huh? Businesses can require shirts for service. Not sure what you are going on about.