Safety - What of it.md 1.8 KB
Safety - What of it?
How do we suddenly have a strong understanding about safety for something just beginning to be used, and which was sought and introduced under the auspices of emergency?
That there are any renowned professionals or experts at all who express disagreement at a time when such dissent is more greatly met with scorn and assassination of character should be sufficient for the lay person to stop and say "okay, perhps I do not understand what is being asked of me. It would be wise for me to wait and see, but it would be wiser for me to ask why this can be compelled, and why are we losing freedom and dignity?"
And let's be clear, it isn't just indefensible to support the excluding of citizens from work over a vaccination status (especially if no court process was used to deliberate the evidence for and against such a mandate - and whether we have a istuation which can qualify a new standard to change our legal precedence), but to even stay silent and idle while 5, or 2, or 1, or 0.5% or even less of your fellow citizens are made to realize their very survival to become more difficult and to stand back while society moves forward with their genocide - there is no defending anyone who took this approach. To fail to demonstrate a minimum level of liberal compassion and awareness/insight into logically deducible potential of risk, not just for those being threatened with no food and money, but the threat for all types of people in a society where the state can make ever-more policies that round people down with greater dehumunization (ironically while trying to construct an aesthetic veil that claims a humanitarian justification), is both a failure or morality and a failure of intelligence.
The path sought by such a society will be merciless and deaf. All must defuse if they are to be in a society where they can expect fairness and justice.