Govt Officials: We never mandated anything, nor did we recommend firing people.

[Old4eyes]

For all those in power who state that Vaccine (and masks) were not forced onto people, they should be glad that "Liar Liar Pants on Fire" is a rhyme and not something real, otherwise, the burn units across the country would be overflowing.

[stormvet]

Two years ago my wife was offered two jobs, one with the Jr college in Pima county. The other with the state of Arizona, the Pima college job paid a bit more but mandated getting the vax. The state job not only didn?t mandate the vax, they never even brought it up. My wife took the job with the state,

[bruss01]

Everyone was capable of NOT getting jabbed. Yes, everyone.

Millions of us aren't.

It wasn't luck, it wasn't magic, it wasn't because we weren't 'forced'... it was a DECISION.

stop blaming others. Own your decisions.

Totally understand what you are saying.

And to an extent, I agree with you.

But it's one thing if you are single, and another thing if you have dependents, and obligations.

If you have a kid or a spouse with cancer or some other medical condition that requires very expensive ongoing treatment... and your health insurance is through your employer. If you say "no" to the jab, you are rolling the dice on being able to find another employer in time to be able to continue providing their medical coverage. Or to continue to meet the mortgage obligation on the home that provides shelter so your family isn't living in the car. If the financial hardship takes a toll on your credit rating, that makes it harder to get the same caliber professional position where that's included in pre-employment background screening. This is a decision with consequences that can be hard to bounce back from. For workers in the latter stages of their careers, it can turn their anticipated retirement from one of adequate provision, to one of privation.

That is more than just offering someone a choice... "would you like cream in your coffee, or just black" is a choice. Threatening to deny your loved one medical treatment... that is more akin to being blackmailed than being offered a "choice". It is coercive, manipulative, and evil.

Everybody had the option to say "no". For some, the consequences of saying "no" appeared to outweigh the benefits. For some, that scale of decision was tipped mightily by unacceptable consequences like losing a house, losing medical coverage, etc.

Not everyone did it just to blend in with the herd or to garner some kind of "approval". For many people it came with costs that far exceeded being socially ostracized or having to look for work. It's unfair to lump the latter in with the former and tell them callously "you had a choice". And being told that by the same government that put them in that position is not only hypocritical but nauseating to see. Sure, lie right to our faces... the "choice" they offered was no choice at all for many.

I was fortunate. I took the gamble on saying "no" and used religious exemption as my shield of choice. The employer made it clear they were denying all such requests except in exceptional cases. I suppose I must have worded mine just right (thanks to some very good advice) because it was granted... except, 366 days later I got laid off after 15 years of stellar performance reviews and annual bonuses. Purely coincidental I'm sure. But I got the severance and unemployment funds I was owed instead of "fired for cause" which is what was threatened. I rolled into a new position (thankfully) without too much discomfort. But I know that I was very fortunate, and a lot of folks weren't. I won't lie and say it wasn't a white-knuckle ride dealing with all that uncertainty, it was. Glad I made the right "choice" but I won't fault others who didn't have the same options the fates handed me.

I think after what we've all been through a lot of people will not put up with this next time... and yes there will be a "next time".

[LBDamned]

^^^ all the 'reasons' in the world - still make it a 'choice'.

No one was 'forced'.

Let's make this simple. If a speed limit on highway is 65 and you go 80, you made a 'choice'... there are all sorts of 'reasons' you should have gone 65 and various outcomes - but you made a choice. Unless the vehicle has a speed governor set at 65, you weren't 'forced' to go 65.

So come up,with all the 'reasons' you want for getting vaxxed. It was a choice and that cant be denied.

[LBDamned]

I think many people are perturbed that they were required to make a decision.

Arguably even that wasn't 'forced', but let's say it was... you were 'forced' to make a decision. I've said before, our lives are full of decisions, some are very impactful - many are life changing, and we don't always make the right ones (I've made life impacting bad decisions, as most people have).

But don't point fingers claiming 'force'. Own your 'decisions'.

[terry4130]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...ed-facilities/

that means if you worked for anyone that did any Fed work you got fired

BTW this is why "They" want Fed Govt to stick its finger in ALL the pies. Its like "6 degrees of Kevin Bacon". Every company will do work for another company that does SOME Fed work.

Yup. I?m a fed contractor, not a fed employee. They mandated anyone on a fed contract to be vaxed, even in cases like me where I?m home (alone) 100%. My company, although woke as the worst of them, didn?t mandate vaxes, but was held to the govt contract requirements. Luckily I was able to get a religious exemption. The damage was done though, as I now have anxiety that randomly comes and goes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[XDJYo]

Think what you want about being forced.

If your current employment is predicated upon checking a box YES or NO, then you are FORCED to make a decision whether you can walk into work the next day or not.

[LBDamned]

Think what you want about being forced.

If your current employment is predicated upon checking a box YES or NO, then you are FORCED to make a decision whether you can walk into work the next day or not.

Forced to make a decision is not the same as Forced to get vaxxed.

It's getting redundant at this point.

[Dooligan]

Regarding forced vs. decisions/choices-

If you (general "you") were "forced", what were you threatened with? Loss of a job?

If so, how many people were fired at your job for not taking the vaccine? Was this just a threat, or was it executed?

Did you document everything and begin to seek out legal representation should it come to that?

I ask because that was the path I had to go down before my company dropped the subject (at least with me). I have young kids and a mortgage, and I was scared of losing my job (for sure), but if it came to a head, there would have been a bitter fight that would end with me not getting vaccinated.

Everything I do is my choice. I always have a choice. "Choose A or B or I kill you"? I still have a choice to choose C (death).

Some choices just come with more pressure than others. Being "forced" takes responsibility out of the equation.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

...That is more than just offering someone a choice... "would you like cream in your coffee, or just black" is a choice. Threatening to deny your loved one medical treatment... that is more akin to being blackmailed than being offered a "choice". It is coercive, manipulative, and evil.

Everybody had the option to say "no". For some, the consequences of saying "no" appeared to outweigh the benefits. For some, that scale of decision was tipped mightily by unacceptable consequences like losing a house, losing medical coverage, etc.

Not everyone did it just to blend in with the herd or to garner some kind of "approval". For many people it came with costs that far exceeded being socially ostracized or having to look for work. It's unfair to lump the latter in with the former and tell them callously "you had a choice". And being told that by the same government that put them in that position is not only hypocritical but nauseating to see. Sure, lie right to our faces... the "choice" they offered was no choice at all for many...

I think many people are perturbed that they were required to make a decision.

Arguably even that wasn't 'forced', but let's say it was... you were 'forced' to make a decision. I've said before, our lives are full of decisions, some are very impactful - many are life changing, and we don't always make the right ones (I've made life impacting bad decisions, as most people have).

But don't point fingers claiming 'force'. Own your 'decisions'.

This is the crux of it for many. Technically, it is a 'choice.' But, that's the same as declaring that no choice is a choice. It reduces the concept of 'choice' to a binary solution set when, in fact, choices are made based on a variety of criteria.

That criteria has been and continues to be the basis for many, even most, of these threads and, in fact, is the very basis for this subforum...

...This forum was intended for the factual discussion of the COVID-19 disease and it's affects, not so people could ride their hobbyhorse around...

One of the definitions of "choice" is "care in selecting." In other words, 'choice' isn't just about the selection of an alternative, but the information which goes into and the process used in making that selection. To that degree, it is not a 'simple' binary solution set. Add to that the idea that, for many, a choice which is 'unnecessarily forced upon them' isn't often seen as consistent in that, if you scroll down the definition page linked to above, you find that, as a noun, one of the explanations states: "CHOICE suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely."

Did we get to truly choose 'freely' in the case of COVID? That is a contentious point and it isn't as 'simple' as marking 'yes' or 'no.' For instance, one can say that a choice based on religious belief is still an action which implies 'free will.' But, is it? Not necessarily for the one making the choice in that choice is actually subsidiary to a previous choice made in relation to a bigger issue. Given that 'religion' is, primarily, an exercise in deductive logic, it would be a violation of the rules of deductive logic to make a decision contrary to the premise one holds. Thus, is a choice which is contrary to one's beliefs actually 'freely made?'

The same with bruss01's example...

...That is more than just offering someone a choice... "would you like cream in your coffee, or just black" is a choice. Threatening to deny your loved one medical treatment... that is more akin to being blackmailed than being offered a "choice". It is coercive, manipulative, and evil...

Do you have the information you truly need to competently make a choice? Relying on 'intuition' vs. 'intellect' vs. some combination is a factor which varies among individuals and isn't something which can consciously be 'controlled.' But, therein lies the key.

Who or what is 'controlling' the information and process(es) which go into making the decision one is supposed to 'own?' If one declares that "only you" are, such is naive. If one declares that "I don't," one is passing the buck. Yet, both aspects play into whatever decision is made.

Thus, 'owning' a decision isn't so much about accepting responsibility for the decision. It's about learning to live with the consequences from making the decision. That's the truly difficult part and it's something which still plagues many in relation to decisions imposed upon them during COVID.

[LBDamned]

Some people are initiative driven, some are born followers and many in the middle are wafflers that couldn't lead their way out of a dark room (and would blame someone else when they stub their toe).

In a society full of finger pointing, I'm not surprised with the lack of self accountability... for 18-24 months, over and over, I posted 'navigate deceit' and 'own your decisions'... countless times... that wasn't to be annoying - it was because I knew we'd be where we are today... a bunch of finger pointing everywhere other than inward.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I won't go into the details of the 'price' I paid for making the choice not to take the so-called 'vaccine.' That's personal. Those who read these threads will see some of the 'logic' I utilized in deriving my decision. But, that decision impacted more than myself and I have to live with the consequences.

Is that initiative driven, being a follower, waffling, lacking self accountability? I don't think so. Does it alter the fact that such a decision was 'forced' upon me? No. It means what I said, living with the ramifications of the decision I made.

Just bear in mind that not everyone had the same information, the same conclusions, the same consequences to consider. It's nice to live in a black & white world where one can't point a finger and say...

Unfortunately, a true black & white world doesn't exist as there are shades to each color and "undefined opposites" (black is often defined as the opposite of white and vice versa) is not something many are capable of hanging their hat on with anything approaching 'confidence' or 'lack of regret.' Thus, it is only natural that a certain amount of retroactive analysis takes place post-decision and, with that, comes a certain amount of identification as to influences on the decision-making process which might not have been the best.

Do some take it too far? Of course. But, as you say, it's not unexpected and it doesn't mean a lack of self accountability. Well, not in "all" cases anyway.

[Dooligan]

It really is a G-damn shame what they did. It breaks my heart.

And eff all of the little authoritarians/Stasi who fanned the flames and fueled it. I effing hate them.

[LBDamned]

This thread topic should be changed to covaxx pity party.

[WOODY2]

Several govt officials in testimony to congress recently explained to congress that they never mandated masks or vaccines and lockdowns really never happened, and you are just crazy if you think you remember them happening.

Take a look.

https://twitter.com/KevinKileyCA/status/1707755250529001905

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...-mandates-ever

Oh yeah? What about the thousands of service members that were let go?