Push for mandatory Covid-19 vaccines in South Africa: report

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,514
While I personally have no problem with mandatory vaccines, this process is still many decades away from being finalized. Many laws need to change, such as the National Health Act, which states that no medical procedure or treatment may be administered without a persons' consent, various employment related acts which states employers cannot discriminate against people. Also the Constitution itself. No court can overrule laws or the Constitution. They can order government to start the process in changing these laws and the constitution. Any company or state organ making this mandatory in the meantime will be acting illegally and against the Constitution. But, along with changing these laws and the Constitution, people will lose a lot more freedom and start falling having government ruling their every day lives.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,560
While I personally have no problem with mandatory vaccines, this process is still many decades away from being finalized. Many laws need to change, such as the National Health Act, which states that no medical procedure or treatment may be administered without a persons' consent, various employment related acts which states employers cannot discriminate against people. Also the Constitution itself. No court can overrule laws or the Constitution. They can order government to start the process in changing these laws and the constitution. Any company or state organ making this mandatory in the meantime will be acting illegally and against the Constitution. But, along with changing these laws and the Constitution, people will lose a lot more freedom and start falling having government ruling their every day lives.
Again, they don't need to rule that you are forced to take the vaccine, they just need to rule that it's allowed as a policy on the grounds of reducing spread / reducing harm to others.
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,514
Again, they don't need to rule that you are forced to take the vaccine, they just need to rule that it's allowed as a policy on the grounds of reducing spread / reducing harm to others.

Exactly where they will fall short in court. It is known now that even fully vaccinated people still get infected. Even fully vaccinated people will still spread the virus. So, reducing the spread or reducing harm to others will likely not stand in court.

What they rather should focus on is that the vaccine reduces the possibility in individuals from ending up in hospital and dying. Then removing those restrictions in laws and constitution that relates to freedom. Here they will stand a better chance.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,560
Exactly where they will fall short in court. It is known now that even fully vaccinated people still get infected. Even fully vaccinated people will still spread the virus. So, reducing the spread or reducing harm to others will likely not stand in court.

What they rather should focus on is that the vaccine reduces the possibility in individuals from ending up in hospital and dying. Then removing those restrictions in laws and constitution that relates to freedom. Here they will stand a better chance.
Again, I never said it fully stops, I said reduction. Stop saying something that I did not say. It's a high enough reduction that it was statistically measurable.

Another issue you seem to be missing is that the average working person does want to get vaccinated, so it will be interesting to see who actually takes this to court.
 

etienne_marais

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
11,201
While I personally have no problem with mandatory vaccines, this process is still many decades away from being finalized. Many laws need to change, such as the National Health Act, which states that no medical procedure or treatment may be administered without a persons' consent, various employment related acts which states employers cannot discriminate against people. Also the Constitution itself. No court can overrule laws or the Constitution. They can order government to start the process in changing these laws and the constitution. Any company or state organ making this mandatory in the meantime will be acting illegally and against the Constitution. But, along with changing these laws and the Constitution, people will lose a lot more freedom and start falling having government ruling their every day lives.
Fascist
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,514
Again, I never said it fully stops, I said reduction. Stop saying something that I did not say. It's a high enough reduction that it was statistically measurable.

Another issue you seem to be missing is that the average working person does want to get vaccinated, so it will be interesting to see who actually takes this to court.

If fully vaccinated people can still get infected and still transmit the virus to others, good luck measuring this with current limited data and taking it to court on those facts.
 

Mike Hoxbig

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
37,737
If fully vaccinated people can still get infected and still transmit the virus to others, good luck measuring this with current limited data and taking it to court on those facts.
The chances of a mutation developing in vaccinated people is much slimmer than unvaccinated.

And every mutation renders the vaccine less effective against the more vulnerable. Which will then require a booster shot, and this whole thing dragging on even longer. If you want life to get back to normal, just got get the thing.

On that basis alone it should be made mandatory. I'm sure the Google scientists and conspiracy theorists will be along soon to show us why this is not the case...
 

rvZA

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
5,514
The chances of a mutation developing in vaccinated people is much slimmer than unvaccinated.

And every mutation renders the vaccine less effective against the more vulnerable. Which will then require a booster shot, and this whole thing dragging on even longer. If you want life to get back to normal, just got get the thing.

On that basis alone it should be made mandatory. I'm sure the Google scientists and conspiracy theorists will be along soon to show us why this is not the case...

The only scientific fact that will prevent them from winning this case in any court, is the fact that the majority of the population refuse to be vaccinated, which renders this useless, because a vaccinated person will still transmit the virus to an unvaccinated person, which will cause mutation once again.

So, perhaps government should rather first focus on another way of getting the vaccine into people's arms. Perhaps their manipulation, lies and force is not the way to go.

If they are going to base their cases in court on scientific evidence, they may not get the approval to change laws to further restrict freedom and remove and limit human rights from the constitution.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
29,560
The only scientific fact that will prevent them from winning this case in any court, is the fact that the majority of the population refuse to be vaccinated, which renders this useless, because a vaccinated person will still transmit the virus to an unvaccinated person, which will cause mutation once again.

So, perhaps government should rather first focus on another way of getting the vaccine into people's arms. Perhaps their manipulation, lies and force is not the way to go.

If they are going to base their cases in court on scientific evidence, they may not get the approval to change laws to further restrict freedom and remove and limit human rights from the constitution.
A majority of the population are not refusing to be vaccinated, you'll have to provide stats to back that one up.

You're saying vaccines are useless in the case of mutation, so since we can't get 100% vaccination we should vaccinate at all, that's a false dilemma.

Just because it mutates doesn't mean it will mutate so the vaccine is ineffective, and it doesn't mean it doesn't already reduce spread and reduce the chance of mutation so less likely need another vaccine variant, nor that the current vaccine will not reduce chance of being severely I'll.

You'll have to say what lies, you keep coming up with more and more lies, constantly saying you're not against vaccines, then say BS like that, then say how vaccines are useless but provide no evidence for it, saying how vaccine don't completely stop the spread when that was never the point but a nice extra, disregarding that it notably reduces spread, saying a majority of the population doesn't want to vaccinate and yet not providing evidence for it.

You are a hypocrite with the way you act, yet you keep accusing me of it, yet I've not once posted something that wasn't backed up by something else and changed my mind when proven wrong, but you instead twist and distort anything said to suit your purpose, I just wish you'd stop posting so less people are misled by you and we actually do end up with more people dying because of your stupidity in regards to vaccines.
 

now05ster

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
1,987
“In these settings, if people choose not to be vaccinated, they should be compelled to undergo testing every three or four days at their own expense,” he said.

The hell.
 
Top