Quote:
Originally Posted by stomachmonkey
Not a sad reality if his associates disagree with him and choose to no longer associate.
Kind of goes to your next point, shouldn't they be allowed to decide who they choose to associate with and why?
As far as people being allowed to decide their risk level I don't disagree with you, we should all be free to decide what level of personal risk we expose our own selves to. But it's not just about ourselves now is it.
I'd argue limiting unvaccinated to some degree of isolated access is a smart financial decision.
More people are vaxxed than not and personally, I'd want to make sure the largest potential customer base felt as comfortable as possible.
As for the kids, every generation has been saddled with making the forward progress that previous generations were unable to accomplish.
It's just how it has always worked.
|
Yeah I guess you are correct. So people with a DUI should be only be permitted to drive the car assigned to them and it should be identifiable to others. But all cars should have an interlock of some sort or a chip reader to ensure those people don't drive other vehicles.
I'd argue limiting to some degree of isolated access is a smart financial decision for anyone with HIV/Aids, Hep B or some other communicable disease and/or should also be identifiable to the general public, be required to wear disposable gloves and face masks or some other measures to ensure they don't transmit their disease to others. I mean I don't want to be the person at the convenience store grabbing the coffee cup or milk after an HIV positive person just took one.
I also think all women should be required to take receive an injectable contraception provided by the male to ensure they don't pregnant.