Mourn, or Else
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Perhaps both "sides" should first vet some rando's online comment, poll the center (privately - there are a lot of ways to do this for free) and if the rando comment happens to be agreed by the mainstream, then sure, write an article. But from what I see, most of the reaction to articles or statements like this is:
"It's not mandatory to mourn him. People aren't being fired because they aren't mourning him."
Which is true.
Perhaps the other article they could write is:
"Take this Vaccine, Or Else!"
That all being said, I have no idea what this article is about, I'm just surmising as it's pay-walled for no reason (advertising exists).
If your private employer considers you a risk, they have every right to make you choose between vaccination or the pink-slip in an at-will employment state. Get over it, there are real issues worth being butthurt over. Unless you live in Montana, the legal side of this was hashed out literal decades ago.
You proved the comment. It is literally Do this or Else and your comment was, get over it, they didn't make you take it - all that will happen is you will lose your job.
So you agree this then, if you don't Mourn Charlie Kirk you should be fired. IT'S THE SAME DAMN ARGUMENT!
2. Not mourning is definitely not something to get fired over
3. A company is not legally allowed to know if you took a vaccine or not because it's protected information under HIPAA so any attempts to standardized that a few years ago was 100% illegal.
So in closing you supporting #3 means you're on the same woke page as people that support firing for not mourning.
I don't think HIPAA protections work the way you think they work. Businesses aren't allowed to know... without your consent. It's perfectly legal to demand that you produce documentation proving your vaccination, your age, or even your medical history before being allowed to do certain things. Many businesses aren't legally allowed to subsume liability without having that documentation. If you don't consent, they will (justifiably) refuse you service.
Can't skydive if you won't prove you don't have scoliosis, can't drink if you won't show your drivers license. Way she goes.
The government forcing people to not be able to attend school or work or whatever, just because they chose to not get vaccinated, is the same as making them. Let’s not play this game - it’s obvious what it is. No one should be compelled to give up their bodily autonomy to participate in society. It’s more just for people who are afraid of the risk of illness to stay at home or wear protective clothing everywhere.
Which is exactly what was intended, so later (like we're seeing now) they could say, "Hey, we didn't make you do it."