(06-20-2022, 02:20 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Sure, the last line of that post was opinion, but it's a fact the government is in the force business, and it's a fact that they created a mandate for hospitals. And it's a fact that those hospitals had to fire people that didn't get the vaccine or go under due to massive fines. And it's a fact that you can safely use that word in context and be correct. It's my opinion that you seem to be conveniently ignoring that in this instance.

And you're ignoring that many if not most of those hospitals already had a mandate in place and would've included Covid as a component without regard to the actions of the government. You seem to think that a government mandate for something means that everyone does it against their will. But, as we go around the circle again, no one has a right to employment. Are you arguing that they do or not? If you agree with me that they do not then this conversation is effectively over because we are in accord. If you disagree with me and say that they do have a right to their employment then we need to shift to something entirely different. You want to talk about why the rules are in place and treat that as your evidence that they had no choice. That's wrong, they had a choice and if they choose to not comply with the rules then they chose to leave their employment. That's not unique to this Covid circumstance, it's a basic fact of life here in Reality World. If you'd quit trying to spin this to align with your anti-Covid vaccine perspective you would see that you agree with me because you would never defend a food service employee not agreeing to wearing gloves and a hair net on the line or washing their hands after using the restroom. There's just no way you would say the employer had to both keep them employed and allow them to flout company policy (even policy that's *gasp* mandated). Except in this one, and it has nothing to do with employment rights and everything to do with your feelings about the vaccine.

---