Nova Scotia to require proof of vaccination for non-essential activities | CBC News
By - hfxlfc
**We encourage you to read our helpful resources on COVID-19, vaccines and treatments:**
[Reddit's Vaccine FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus/wiki/faq#wiki_where_can_i_find_information_about_the_mechanism_and_progress_of_vaccines.3F)
A reminder that spreading misinformation regarding COVID-19, vaccines or other treatments can result in a post being removed and/or a ban. Advocating for or celebrating the death of anyone, or hoping someone gets COVID (or any disease) can also result in a ban. Please follow [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)
Please use the report button and do not feed the trolls.
[Reddit's Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy)
[Reddit's stance on misinformation](https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/pbmy5y/debate_dissent_and_protest_on_reddit)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/news) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Being a dumb ass anti-vax conspiracy moron doesn't make you a protected class.
You have a choice, but you're going to suffer the consequences of being an idiot and you can suffer them alone if your fucking room.
Because benefits outweigh the risk.
You get: vaccinated
You don’t: die
Plenty people who have been vaccinated have still died, people who are healthy and in my age group who have caught covid haven't died. Pretty simple.
Yet, you’re much less likely to spread or obtain the virus with the vaccine, than without.
But of course, people of your ilk like to act contrary so do you. Hope the best for you and your family.
With it I can still get the virus and I can still share the virus though, and on top of that for all I know my partners menstrual cycles might stop as a result of the vaccination, we wouldn't be able to have children and then life would be even more meaningless. I'll reconsider when I see the evidence that pregnant women are continuing to have babies without issues. We'll have to agree to disagree but I hope the best for you and your family.
This is clearly against the United States Constitution. When one part of North America falls, so does the rest of it.
Supreme court rulings say otherwise. Vaccine mandates are entirely constitutional and can even have enforcement mechanisms like fines and jail time for people who refuse to vaccinate.
Vaccine mandates are more American than apple pie and Baseball, just ask George Washington.
We'll see what today's incomprehensibly based supreme court says about past precedent. Depending on the circumstances they don't always have to follow it.
Nothing, as it won't get there in the first place.
That's naive to think that. Why wouldn't it? People will sue in Federal court and it may get there eventually.
Things don't automatically end up in the Supreme court. You may want to learn how the justice system in the US actually works before you start calling people naive.
I know how the appeals process works. There's a chance they may decide a vaccine mandate case in the future. It's not a guarantee.
Your comments demonstrate otherwise.
Not really. I think that definitely saying that the supreme court won't hear a case about vaccine mandates is a bit of a stretch. They could totally reject it, but maybe they'll take it. They've already been willing to hear other cases that concerned pandemic restrictions. I could see them being more interested in a case that had to do with (hypothetically) religious exemptions not being respected rather than a general mandate.
Religious exemptions didn't even get to the appeals level with California SB277, let alone the Supreme Court. Once again proving you don't understand the appeals process.
On the contrary, I'm starting to understand why there were vaccine mandates in the past combined with the social requirement of quarantine islands.
Yes I understand that a *ton* of stuff gets rejected. But I have no reason to think they wouldn't take up a vaccine mandate case if it made it to them, especially if the mandate was an actual federal mandate (unlike the Illinois one that got rejected). Don't assume I don't know about the appeals process just because we disagree.
You do realize that Nova Scotia is a province in Canada, right?
Yes I was kidding. Sometimes it's better to leave the /s out and see what happens.
sigh, I could argue a ton of points but let's just start off with calling you a dumbass for thinking NS was part of the US and work our way down from there.
I can tell that you can't tell when someone is joking haha. It *is* more difficult online.
thankfully it is
Sounds like you don't know much about America to me.
Why just non-essential?
Because you can't deny a person essential services with out a lot of change to acts we have in place; it would also open a Pandora's box of issues.
Except you are denying those services to the immunocompromised by virtue of permitting access to the stupid. We are forced to pick between the two groups. Why are we preferring the interests of the stupid? Besides, they'll get vaxxed if they dislike the new rules.
I see what you are saying but again amending the health care act isn't something that provincial level government can do. Also by saying no medical exemptions while harsh to a small group cuts out the BS that the much larger group would try to pull by getting exemptions that were questionable or citing religious reasons. It's also been shown that vaccinated people can still carry covid (albeit far less from what they've seem so far) and transmit it along so would we doing immunocompromised people that much of a favour in the end?