Florida Governor bans vaccine passports

[mom says]

13 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

Limiting someone to attend, eat, drink, relax, shop, vacation etc should not be based on vaccines

You are free to hold whatever opinion you wish.  BUT. The fact remains that businesses like airlines  and cruiselines have been doing this for years. They must require proof before boarding that you meet all of the entry requirements of the destination (s) you will  arrive at. This has always included mandatory vaccinations such as yellow fever. Countries all over the world are looking at proof of vaccination as a condition for entry, just as they are now requiring proof of negative PCR tests. Hopefully the North American  countries will do the same. Some people seem to be getting hung up on the word "passport".  It may be electronic, it may be paper. It may be called a passport or it may be called a certificate. It's just proof of vaccination. And IMHO, it should be a requirement for international travel until COVID 19 is far in the rear view mirror.

[Goodtime Cruizin]

20 minutes ago, hvbaskey said:

My point was a business can set their own rules.  Don’t like the rules? Then don’t be a patron of said business.  Simple as that.

so w your post you’d be cool w screening your religious beliefs? Your political beleiefs? Your social beliefs? Because many ‘believe’ that the vaccine is not safe. There is no difference. What you’re requesting is that business’ open only to this that believe a certain way.

[TrulyBlonde]

10 minutes ago, bEwAbG said:

 

 

This housing boom is happening nationwide.  Has zero to do with governors or political parties.  There is low inventory because people do not want to sell their houses during the pandemic yet some people must move and need a place to live, so demand is very high.  This housing shortage was true before the pandemic but has only be exacerbated during it.  We have also had historically low interest rates that make borrowing cheap.  There were also many in the past year getting out of dense city centers and heading to suburbs or vacation areas as teleworking full-time became a real possibility for a lot of people.

Yes, where I live in a CO ski town they have been coming and buying like a swarm of locusts. Leaving CA and NY as quickly as they can. My daughter works in FL and the number of new clients she has is amazing and we all know where they are coming from. 

Enjoy DC.

 

[Arizona Wildcat]

6 hours ago, DirtyDawg said:

We don't need any government issued proof of vaccination.  If Celebrity wants my proof of vaccination before I can board the ship it's right here.

 

 

Sadly being vaccinated does not guarantee you are coved free.

The discussion here looks more likely the idiotic exchanges on the Royal board.

No governor can ban you having a record of your vaccination.  They also cannot ban the database from the location where you got your shot or the record held by your insurance company.

Much adoo about nothing.  Just more stupid politics IMO.

[bEwAbG]

9 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

so w your post you’d be cool w screening your religious beliefs? Your political beleiefs? Your social beliefs? Because many ‘believe’ that the vaccine is not safe. There is no difference. What you’re requesting is that business’ open only to this that believe a certain way.

 

Communicable diseases are quite different than religion, which is protected under federal civil rights law.  As far as political and social beliefs, there are stories every few weeks about some owner or another making it known that people who do not believe as they do are welcome to take their business elsewhere.  Not illegal unless it is discriminatory under a state or federal public accommodation law.

 

People can believe all sorts of things that are not true.  Doesn't mean that businesses have to humor them.

[AstoriaPreppy]

1 hour ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

If you chose to be vaccinated, that is your personal choice. You choice was based on your best needs. Your protection. Likewise, if someone else chooses not be vaccinated then so be it. It is their choice. It is their lack of protection.

Vaccination is not just about you being protected... it’s about preventing spread to everyone. 

 

We need a critical mass of people to be vaccinated. This stops both the spread of a virus, and prevents it from mutating. Doing one without the other is a zero sum game. 
 

The worst case scenario in a mass vaccination effort is where a large part of the population is vaccinated, but enough people chose not to get vaccinate that a virus continues to spread. The mutations caused by these unvaccinated people can then easily re-infect vaccinated people, because they may not carry immunity to new mutations. The more people we don’t vaccinate, the more likely this is to happen.  

[morechances]

38 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

so w your post you’d be cool w screening your religious beliefs? Your political beleiefs? Your social beliefs? Because many ‘believe’ that the vaccine is not safe. There is no difference. What you’re requesting is that business’ open only to this that believe a certain way

Not even close.

Helmets are not mandatory in Florida,but are in other places. Does that give Floridians that do not believe in helmets the right to ride without one in Michigan? NOPE.

 

[AstoriaPreppy]

38 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

so w your post you’d be cool w screening your religious beliefs? Your political beleiefs? Your social beliefs?

The Supreme Court has been very receptive to corporate and business interests over the rights of individuals over the last 20 years. Since the 2010 Citizens United case, the US Supreme Court has stipulated that corporations and businesses are essentially people, and should have the same legal rights and responsibilities that people do. 
 

For example, in a 2018 case, Masterpiece Cakeshop declined to make a cake for a gay wedding, and was sanctioned by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
 

In overturning the decision in favor of the cake store owners, the Supreme Court took a narrow view, but a majority of the court signaled they would be receptive to further challenges that would allow business owners legal protections to only serve clients with similar beliefs. 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

18 minutes ago, AstoriaPreppy said:

Vaccination is not just about you being protected... it’s about preventing spread to everyone. 

 

We need a critical mass of people to be vaccinated. This stops both the spread of a virus, and prevents it from mutating. Doing one without the other is a zero sum game. 
 

The worst case scenario in a mass vaccination effort is where a large part of the population is vaccinated, but enough people chose not to get vaccinate that a virus continues to spread. The mutations caused by these unvaccinated people can then easily re-infect vaccinated people, because they may not carry immunity to new mutations. The more people we don’t vaccinate, the more likely this is to happen.  

Wrong. The vaccine is for one’s protection from severe illness & death. 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

6 minutes ago, morechances said:

Not even close.

Helmets are not mandatory in Florida,but are in other places. Does that give Floridians that do not believe in helmets the right to ride without one in Michigan? NOPE.

 

Pfft. 
Sounds like you’re good w one beliefs being discriminated. Got it

[morechances]

31 minutes ago, bEwAbG said:

 

Communicable diseases are quite different than religion, which is protected under federal civil rights law.  As far as political and social beliefs, there are stories every few weeks about some owner or another making it known that people who do not believe as they do are welcome to take their business elsewhere.  Not illegal unless it is discriminatory under a state or federal public accommodation law.

 

People can believe all sorts of things that are not true.  Doesn't mean that businesses have to humor them.

I will go one step further..... people can believe all sorts of things, whether you agree or not, does not mean it is true or false. 

But neither gives you the permission to ignore the rules set. And a business has the right to make sure that it's patrons are as safe as possible. Actually, they have a responsibly to keep the majority of their patrons safe.

And, at this point in time, SCIENTIFIC proof shows that vaccines work. And, I am not simply talking about any specific vaccine.

 

[Goodtime Cruizin]

6 minutes ago, AstoriaPreppy said:

The Supreme Court has been very receptive to corporate and business interests over the rights of individuals over the last 20 years. Since the 2010 Citizens United case, the US Supreme Court has stipulated that corporations and businesses are essentially people, and should have the same legal rights and responsibilities that people do. 
 

For example, in a 2018 case, Masterpiece Cakeshop declined to make a cake for a gay wedding, and was sanctioned by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
 

In overturning the decision in favor of the cake store owners, the Supreme Court took a narrow view, but a majority of the court signaled they would be receptive to further challenges that would allow business owners legal protections to only serve clients with similar beliefs. 

And that cake maker is still being sued! 

[morechances]

3 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

Wrong. The vaccine is for one’s protection from severe illness & death. 

Nope

[Fouremco]

1 hour ago, mnocket said:

There will always be disagreement when it comes to government's proper role in controlling its citizens.  While one person sees a "vaccination passport" as the start of a slippery slope, others see it as a harmless aid to facilitate safe travel.  These opposing viewpoints are not going be resolved.

 

In such situations I ask myself....  Is it truly necessary?

 

My conclusion is that it is not.

• Many schools have long required proof of vaccinations for its students.  We have accomplished this without vaccination passports. True, but many school boards still require proof. The form is different but the substance of the requirement is the same.
• International travelers have sometimes been required to present proof of vaccination in order to enter certain countries.  We have accomplished this without vaccination passports. A rose by any other name... Would we see the same objections raised if we were to rename the "International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis" as the "Vaccination Passport"? It serves the same function however it is named.

I'm sure there are other examples.  The bottom line is that we have satisfied the need to establish vaccination status without a vaccination passport. Yes, but by providing proof nevertheless. 

 

As for the potential downside to issuing vaccination passports....

It would be so easy for a vaccination passport to morph into a "health" or "fitness to travel" passport. I disagree with the slippery slope argument. It's very easy to have a single purpose document with the sole intent of proof of vaccination. 

 

Remember a few months back when we were discussing cruise lines wanting a doctor's note clearing passengers of a certain age to cruise?  Once a vaccination passport exists, it's not unimaginable to think that cruise lines might want such doctor's certifications added to the "passport". Different issue. What Celebrity might want is not what has to appear in the vaccination document.

 

Another example.....  is it totally unthinkable that perhaps the travel industry would like to see a "mobility score" added to the passport?  It would certainly help them decide which passengers were appropriate for which tours. Again, there are many things that cruise lines might want, but it doesn't have to be tied to a vaccination document. You are greasing the slippery slope! 😁

 

There are many other ways a vaccination passport may morph into something larger.  This has the potential to take the decision for travel modes and experiences away from the individual and place it in the hands of travel providers.  You can no longer do xyz because your travel passport makes you undesirable to the travel provider.  Sure there are legitimate reasons for travel restrictions, but a "health passport" would open the door to all kinds of subtle discrimination.  Do you want to take that chance? I've held a Canadian passport since I was 16. In those 57 years, there have been minor changes made to the format of the passport, the length of its validity and the federal government department responsible for issuing them even changed back in 2013, but the fundamental purpose of the passport has remained unchanged.

Please expand the above post to see my additional comments.

 

You refer to a "health passport", but no one has suggested that. Just as the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis hasn't morphed into a general record of the holder's health, there is no reason why a COVID-19 vaccination document can't simply reflect the necessary details of this one medical event. 

 

I don't know what information is contained in US state-issued drivers' licenses, or the requirements of other Canadian provinces, but in Ontario there are specific medical requirements, and restrictions such as needing to wear corrective lenses are reflected on the license itself. Depending on your age and the category of license, you need to submit an annual medical report. People who have had a stroke have their licence revoked and must be examined for competency before it it reinstated. I've yet to see a hue and cry over the acquisition and retention of any of this medical information or the listing of medical restriction on the license.

 

IMO, a vaccine document would facilitate such endeavours as ensuring that all passengers are vaccinated. With the complete hodgepodge of documents handed out to people being vaccinated, Celebrity might just as well ask the question "Have you been vaccinated?" and accept a positive answer with no form of proof. 

 

All that said, whether it's call a passport, record of vaccination, vaccine credentials or some other name, I don't think that we are likely to see one in the immediate future. Nevertheless, both President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau have expressed support for the concept and I think it will happen. Both governments perceive a need, and I suspect that it's just a matter of time.

 

As always, JMO, and I post in full recognition that others might read the tea leaves differently.

Edited April 4, 2021 by Fouremco

[morechances]

2 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

Pfft. 
Sounds like you’re good w one beliefs being discriminated. Got it

I am about having the right to be safe. 

[morechances]

We are all forgetting one thing.

 

Cruises go to other countries, with different laws and beliefs.

[Goodtime Cruizin]

1 hour ago, mom says said:

You are free to hold whatever opinion you wish.  BUT. The fact remains that businesses like airlines  and cruiselines have been doing this for years. They must require proof before boarding that you meet all of the entry requirements of the destination (s) you will  arrive at. This has always included mandatory vaccinations such as yellow fever. Countries all over the world are looking at proof of vaccination as a condition for entry, just as they are now requiring proof of negative PCR tests. Hopefully the North American  countries will do the same. Some people seem to be getting hung up on the word "passport".  It may be electronic, it may be paper. It may be called a passport or it may be called a certificate. It's just proof of vaccination. And IMHO, it should be a requirement for international travel until COVID 19 is far in the rear view mirror.

But the airlines aren’t requiring it now unless an international destination requires it. So your argument is weak

[farmermd]

1 minute ago, morechances said:

I am about having the right to be safe. 

Isn't your right to be safe to wear a mask if you choose and get a vaccination if you choose?  To avoid businesses you don't feel safe in?  

[Fouremco]

2 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

But the airlines aren’t requiring it now unless an international destination requires it. So your argument is weak

The last time that I checked, all Celebrity cruises include one or more foreign destinations.

[morechances]

7 minutes ago, farmermd said:

Isn't your right to be safe to wear a mask if you choose and get a vaccination if you choose?  To avoid businesses you don't feel safe in?  

Exactly!!!

So, what is the difference between my right to feel safe and your right to do what you want?

We both have equal rights. 

There is no winner or loser here.

[farmermd]

2 minutes ago, morechances said:

Exactly!!!

So, what is the difference between my right to feel safe and your right to do what you want?

We both have equal rights. 

There is no winner or loser here.

Thx - just making sure I understood you correctly.  

[Spif Barwunkel]

New Florida Signs, if the Governor has his way.

 

"Welcome To Florida, The Sunshine State. We Won't Mask Your Tan."

 

"The Only Shots Our Cruise Ships Demand, Require A Glass." "Stay Thirsty My Friends."

[morechances]

Just now, farmermd said:

Thx - just making sure I understood you correctly.  

As long as everyone is aware of the fact that I have a right to feel safe, and if anti vaxers or anti maskers are invading my rights, I also have an equal right to be safe and their rights are not stronger than mine.

So, I do not have to go somewhere else just because you want to exercise your beliefs and rights.

 

[farmermd]

3 minutes ago, morechances said:

As long as everyone is aware of the fact that I have a right to feel safe, and if anti vaxers or anti maskers are invading my rights, I also have an equal right to be safe and their rights are not stronger than mine.

So, I do not have to go somewhere else just because you want to exercise your beliefs and rights.

 

But wait - earlier you said we have equal rights but now you are saying your rights are stronger than mine.  If my medical condition prevents me from wearing a mask or getting a vaccine, how does that invade your rights?  No one is asking you to go elsewhere.  It is your choice.  

[mnocket]

12 minutes ago, Fouremco said:

Please expand the above post to see my additional comments.

 

You refer to a "health passport", but no one has suggested that. Just as the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis hasn't morphed into a general record of the holder's health, there is no reason why a COVID-19 vaccination document can't simply reflect the necessary details of this one medical event. 

 

I don't know what information is contained in US state-issued drivers' licenses, or the requirements of other Canadian provinces, but in Ontario there are specific medical requirements, and restrictions such as needing to wear corrective lenses are reflected on the license itself. Depending on your age and the category of license, you need to submit an annual medical report. People who have had a stroke have their licence revoked and must be examined for competency before it it reinstated. I've yet to see a hue and cry over the acquisition and retention of any of this medical information or the listing of medical restriction on the license.

 

IMO, a vaccine document would facilitate such endeavours as ensuring that all passengers are vaccinated. With the complete hodgepodge of documents handed out to people being vaccinated, Celebrity might just as well ask the question "Have you been vaccinated?" and accept a positive answer with no form of proof. 

 

All that said, whether it's call a passport, record of vaccination, vaccine credentials or some other name, I don't think that we are likely to see one in the immediate future. Nevertheless, both President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau have expressed support for the concept and I think it will happen. Both governments perceive a need, and I suspect that it's just a matter of time.

 

As always, JMO, and I post in full recognition that others might read the tea leaves differently.

Yes.  Everything you say is true if you take a benign view of a vaccination passport.  However, I can show my vaccination records, along with any other requested health records, today.  I don't need a vaccination passport.  That said, if a vaccination passport is just another form of documenting my vaccination status I have no objection - although I could argue it's redundant and unnecessary, but let's not argue that as it's a minor point.

 

My issue is that many programs grow beyond their original intended purpose.  Once a vaccination passport exists, people/companies/governments will no doubt see extensions that would be of benefit to them.  I pointed out a couple in my original post....

• Some cruise lines have already indicated a requirement for passengers of a certain age be certified by their Dr as fit to travel.
• I can imagine certain travel/tour companies would like to see an indication of a traveler's mobility (mobility score?)

It would be logical for some to see these (and other) fitness to travel metrics added  to a vaccination passport should one exist.  The obvious problem is that such information could be used for subtle discrimination - letting travel companies filter out less desirable customers - or worse.

 

Of course this may not happen.  A vaccination passport may remain forever nothing more than it was originally intended to be.  It would be benign and even helpful.  The question is.....  will this be the case?  Some people strongly believe that will be the case.  For me, I see a risk.  Maybe I'm jaded, but I believe programs have a tendency to grow in scope.  Once started, they can take on a life of their own.

 

So in the final analysis, it comes down to how you assess the benefit against the risk.  For me the potential for abuse (risk) outweighs the benefit.  Others are certainly entitled to differing opinions.