DeSantis could sink our chances of cruising out of Florida

[DCGuy64]

23 minutes ago, jaredhamburg said:

I am just concerned when "protecting others" is used in such a way.  It is a very slippery slope.

Exactly, and this is the $64,000 question. If people begin to accept the notion that the government has the right to demand all kinds of things from individual citizens in the name of "protecting others," where does it end?

[jaredhamburg]

2 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Thank you for your sympathy on my mother's loss.  Moderna and Pfizer have both recently said that they will have sufficient data to go for full and final FDA approval of their vaccines within a few months.  What will be the argument then, other than a dispute as to legal standing?  I'm sure there will be challenges, but mandates have been supported in the past, which is an indication of how things will likely go.

Honestly, it would be left with the same arguments people have had about vaccinations in general.  Some people do not give them to their kids, forgoing public schools.  I have a daughter with an autoimmune condition and son with autism.  There has been research going back and forth over the years on whether the vaccines I let them have may have caused this.  So, yes, I am very cautious about what is injected in them.

[At Sea At Peace]

1 hour ago, Pratique said:

We don't get to decide for them what is best for us.

 

With all due respect, this statement is antithetical of just about everything I believe.

 

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

With all due respect, this statement is antithetical of just about everything I believe.

 

CS Lewis was one of the greatest minds of the 20th century. His passing would have been, I think, mourned in an even greater way were it not for the date of his death. He died the same day that Kennedy was shot.

[Keksie]

12 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

The obligation begins and ends when there is a deadly virus that impacts us all.  Common human decency and, yes, moral obligation comes into play.  I agree that people also have an obligation to not drink and drive and there are criminal and civil penalties for doing so.  Those who choose to drink and drive are violating their obligation to others as well.  Shall we have criminal or civil penalties against those who have been intentionally negligent and sickened another with COVID? 

 

My mother died of COVID.  She lived in a congregate elder care center in Florida and never left there.  A staff member brought COVID into the facility and sickened 40 out of 80 patients, numerous of which passed away, including my mother who suffered terribly.  I don't know whether that staff person was intentionally negligent, but that person suffered no consequences for their actions/inactions.  But I still hold them and the facility she was in responsible for her death.  My opinion.  It is not a slippery slope when it comes to common sense and decency. 

 

Finally, there will be no federal mandate for vaccines at this time.  Could that change in the future.  Maybe.  Vaccine mandates have been upheld in all 50 states for public schools and universities.  The EEOC has said that employers can mandate the COVID vaccine as well.  These mandates have, and will likely continue to be legally supported.  If the cruise lines mandate vaccines it is well within their rights to do so at this time.  Personal freedom and liberty will be left shoreside.

I am so sorry for your loss.  It is hard to lose a parent.  

I just don't think it is my responsibility to protect others.  I am not police, fire or ems, army etc. when that would be my job.  I will protect myself and my family as I decide.  We have been vaccinated and I am fine with what others choose to do for themselves.  I don't plan to cruise for a very long time not because of the vaccination issue but because of the restrictions that may be in place either way.  Until I can be sure that there will be no masks, no testing of people with no symptoms, no restricted access to public areas such as the pool or theater, no tracelets, no restrictions on port activities and a defined policy to deal with a positive case that does not include quarantine of people who may have been close to that person or a disruption of the cruise I will not be putting my money towards a cruise.  We will be taking road trips this summer.

[At Sea At Peace]

5 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Exactly, and this is the $64,000 question. If people begin to accept the notion that the government has the right to demand all kinds of things from individual citizens in the name of "protecting others," where does it end?

 

Well, with just a couple of seats in the lower chamber and a draw in the upper one (sans the tiebreaker), such has already been touted as clearly as a mandate (of the voters) to fundamentally transform . . . . . .  

 

I'd say, civics lessons must be confusing these days on zoom, when the Executive Branch is legislating, the Legislative Branch is conducting judicial proceedings and the highest level of the Judicial Branch won't accept cases regarding such.  🤪

 

 

[MommaBear55]

25 minutes ago, Iamcruzin said:

Tell that to those in Windjammer during lunch on embarkation day.

Not sure it's a riot as much as a shark feeding frenzy! In either case, it can be scary

[Pratique]

8 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

With all due respect, this statement is antithetical of just about everything I believe.

 

 

It's a cruise line, not the government. Don't like it, don't sail.

[Jimbo]

8 minutes ago, Keksie said:

 

I just don't think it is my responsibility to protect others.  

I stopped reading your post after this sentence. How sad...........

Edited April 15, 2021 by Jimbo

[RFerrington]

30 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

 Personal freedom and liberty will be left shoreside.

Wow !  Anyone who believes this deserves what they get.

[harkinmr]

10 minutes ago, jaredhamburg said:

Honestly, it would be left with the same arguments people have had about vaccinations in general.  Some people do not give them to their kids, forgoing public schools.  I have a daughter with an autoimmune condition and son with autism.  There has been research going back and forth over the years on whether the vaccines I let them have may have caused this.  So, yes, I am very cautious about what is injected in them.

I agree that the same arguments will be present.  But, the arguments that I see presented all the time that it's too early, it's experimental, there's no full approval, etc. will be negated.   I am not speaking at all to COVID vaccines for children.  I firmly believe that parents should make those decisions concerning their children's health.  Reasonable accommodations have been made for schooling, or parents have chosen to educate their children at home.  The fact of the matter remains that cruise lines can, at this time, mandate vaccines for safe sailing.  No accommodations need to be made.  If that means persons who have chosen not to be vaccinated can't sail then that is unfortunate for them.  I fully support a cruise line's right to make a business decision in this regard.  JMO.

[At Sea At Peace]

2 minutes ago, Pratique said:

It's a cruise line, not the government. Don't like it, don't sail.

 

We'll look at what the cruise lines require and decide.  We're in favor of vaccination requirements for identified cruises.

 

Correct, cruise lines are not a government, but my response was more towards governments, and strengthened to the maximum, in their regard and your statement that implies (and continues to) that we don't get to decide what they think is good for us.  IMO, yes we do with regard to governments.

 

Take care.  

[Pratique]

1 minute ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

We'll look at what the cruise lines require and decide.  We're in favor of vaccination requirements for identified cruises.

 

Correct, cruise lines are not a government, but my response was more towards governments, and strengthened to the maximum, in their regard and your statement that implies (and continues to) that we don't get to decide what they think is good for us.  IMO, yes we do with regard to governments.

 

Take care.  

I'm not talking about the government. I'm talking about the cruise line. Their ship, their rules.

[At Sea At Peace]

3 minutes ago, Pratique said:

I'm not talking about the government. I'm talking about the cruise line. Their ship, their rules.

 

Not to get too complex, but if it's only the cruise lines that make all of the rules, and the government does not (not a factor), why are the cruise lines not sailing from US ports?

 

 

 

 

[Pratique]

5 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

Not to get too complex, but if it's only the cruise lines that make all of the rules, and the government does not (not a factor), why are the cruise lines not sailing from US ports?

As has been discussed on these forums, the CDC doesn't make the rules for sailing. CDC solicited public comments last year, maybe you had a chance to submit your own comments at that time? That would have been a good chance for you to speak your piece.

 

The cruise lines will present their plans to the CDC for approval or rejection. The issue appears to be that the cruise lines and the CDC are not seeing eye to eye on what it workable and acceptable. But at the end of the day the cruise lines will be the ones making the rules.

[ArthurUSCG]

7 minutes ago, Pratique said:

As has been discussed on these forums, the CDC doesn't make the rules for sailing. CDC solicited public comments last year, maybe you had a chance to submit your own comments at that time? That would have been a good chance for you to speak your piece.

 

The cruise lines will present their plans to the CDC for approval or rejection. The issue appears to be that the cruise lines and the CDC are not seeing eye to eye on what it workable and acceptable. But at the end of the day the cruise lines will be the ones making the rules.

You are forgetting the major part of cruising, where the ship can dock.  The Bahamas, Canada, etc can require vaccinations to enter/dock in their country, this is nothing new, the WHO Yellow Card has been around since 1933.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Certificate_of_Vaccination_or_Prophylaxis#International_Sanitary_Conventions_(1933–1951)

[DCGuy64]

13 minutes ago, Pratique said:

As has been discussed on these forums, the CDC doesn't make the rules for sailing. CDC solicited public comments last year, maybe you had a chance to submit your own comments at that time? That would have been a good chance for you to speak your piece.

 

The cruise lines will present their plans to the CDC for approval or rejection. The issue appears to be that the cruise lines and the CDC are not seeing eye to eye on what it workable and acceptable. But at the end of the day the cruise lines will be the ones making the rules.

Earlier, you stated "their ship, their rules."  But that is really only part of the story, as I'm sure you'd agree. What a ship or a cruise line does as a matter of policy is up to them, and requiring vaccinations might be a part of that. But as you acknowledge above, cruise lines do have to comply with national laws and regulations, maybe even local ones. So if the CDC doesn't allow sailing, then RCCL can't simply say "we're sailing anyway, screw the CDC, our ship, our rules." It doesn't work that way. And I don't think you were arguing that. I'm just pointing out that cruise lines may have to obey rules and not just do as they please. FWIW I did happen to submit my comments to the CDC during the comment period you alluded to.

[jaredhamburg]

18 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

I agree that the same arguments will be present.  But, the arguments that I see presented all the time that it's too early, it's experimental, there's no full approval, etc. will be negated.   I am not speaking at all to COVID vaccines for children.  I firmly believe that parents should make those decisions concerning their children's health.  Reasonable accommodations have been made for schooling, or parents have chosen to educate their children at home.  The fact of the matter remains that cruise lines can, at this time, mandate vaccines for safe sailing.  No accommodations need to be made.  If that means persons who have chosen not to be vaccinated can't sail then that is unfortunate for them.  I fully support a cruise line's right to make a business decision in this regard.  JMO.

I agree it is the cruise line's right to impose a vaccine requirement (as long as they reimburse future cruise credits in cash for people unwilling to be vaccinated).  I am speaking more about the argument for public health and how some people believe others should be forced to take it to be a "good" member of society.  Thank you for the discussion!

[Pratique]

3 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

FWIW I did happen to submit my comments to the CDC during the comment period you alluded to.

This makes me very happy to hear. I wish more people would become more engaged like this. It may not seem like it makes a difference but it's better than doing nothing.

[DCGuy64]

1 minute ago, Pratique said:

This makes me very happy to hear. I wish more people would become more engaged like this. It may not seem like it makes a difference but it's better than doing nothing.

Agreed. I felt the same way when I emailed my two Virginia Senators and asked them to support a bill sponsored by the two Florida Senators to help cruising resume. Did it help? Who knows? But I certainly felt as though I'd done something other than complain (and I already do too much of that as it is).

[Pratique]

3 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Agreed. I felt the same way when I emailed my two Virginia Senators and asked them to support a bill sponsored by the two Florida Senators to help cruising resume. Did it help? Who knows? But I certainly felt as though I'd done something other than complain (and I already do too much of that as it is).

I only started to become engaged in civics later in life, and I will admit it is not easy. It takes time and thought and effort - and, sometimes, courage (especially if testifying in public). But I've realized that complaining to no one in particular isn't very effective. So when they say "call your senator," "call your congressman," that is important because that is how we have our voice - a voice that many world citizens do not have. And discussions here - to the extent they are civil - are important to have as well.

 

14 minutes ago, jrapps said:

I am sorry if this got off track. I feel that a lot of posts in this thread and on this site get too political, too emotional, too heated. Tying this back to the reason this thread even exists, I personally do not think Desantis thought this through. My gut tells me he is acting politically, not responsibly, and is riling up a base by saying extreme things. This isn't Democrat vs Republican, liberal vs democrat. This is about doing everything you can to stimulate the economy, protect people's rights and liberties, protecting people's health and wellbeing, AND treating everyone with respect. That just doesn't happen anymore.

It is yet another wedge issue, and it seems to be working effectively because as an independent I feel a bit homeless these days.

[harkinmr]

24 minutes ago, jrapps said:

This is the type of logic that saddens me.  To each his own. You are entitled to this opinion, I respect (and would vigorously defend) your right to have it. But it is one of the signs of what has become toxic in our society. We are at our root, selfish. We only care about ourselves, others be damned.

 

I don't feel like wearing a mask even though it might help protect others lives, and my life is all that matters, so it's not my responsibility to protect others.

 

My black neighbor is the victim of racism, but I'm white and it doesn't affect me, so its not my responsibility to protect others.

 

My Jewish neighbors are being hauled off to concentration camps, but I'm not Jewish so its not my responsibility to protect others.

 

I am not saying that you personally have these extreme beliefs, but you can see how to others this type of perspective can be interpreted? I was raised to treat others the way you wanted to be treated. How can I expect others to care what happens to me if I don't care what happens to other people.

 

I am sorry if this got off track. I feel that a lot of posts in this thread and on this site get too political, too emotional, too heated. Tying this back to the reason this thread even exists, I personally do not think Desantis thought this through. My gut tells me he is acting politically, not responsibly, and is riling up a base by saying extreme things. This isn't Democrat vs Republican, liberal vs democrat. This is about doing everything you can to stimulate the economy, protect people's rights and liberties, protecting people's health and wellbeing, AND treating everyone with respect. That just doesn't happen anymore.

 

You can be pro or against masks, vaccines, passports, restrictions, etc. But the moment you make this all about YOU and not about how it may affect others, we've already lost. There are plenty of examples of things that I can't do (steal, murder) or are forced to do (wear seat belts, stop at red lights) that are just for the betterment of society as a whole. There are things that we want/need to do that are protected as rights in our society (speech, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness) but again those are for the betterment of society as a whole, not to protect your rights at the expense of others rights. We too often jump to extremes without walking a mile in the shoes of someone on the other side of the discussion.

Excellent post!  Thank you, and very well said.

[At Sea At Peace]

1 hour ago, Pratique said:

As has been discussed on these forums, the CDC doesn't make the rules for sailing. CDC solicited public comments last year, maybe you had a chance to submit your own comments at that time? That would have been a good chance for you to speak your piece.

 

The cruise lines will present their plans to the CDC for approval or rejection. The issue appears to be that the cruise lines and the CDC are not seeing eye to eye on what it workable and acceptable. But at the end of the day the cruise lines will be the ones making the rules.

 

"The CDC doesn't make the rules for sailing," but the CDC solicited comments last year regarding the rules for sailing.  And they don't make the rules?  Are you serious?  See CDC website and timeline below.  Yikes.

 

Then, after that doozy, deflect to whether I provided input to the CDC as a prequalification for having any opinion?  Under your logic, why would anyone if the CDC in fact doesn't make the rules for sailing as you state?  That has zero to do with making comments on social media such as CruiseCritic. 

 

It also is severely naive, especially in todays historic DC cesspool establishment, to believe that letters to the CDC would have an impact.  The CDC takes it daily bread as broken by the Executive Branch and as buttered by the buttress of similarly aligned House and Senate members.

 

Here's today's cruise enthusiasts of such land-o-lakes ~

 

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/24792-u-s-politicians-urge-cdc-to-keep-cruise-industry-closed.html

 

 

 

Framework for Conditional Sailing Order for Cruise

April 2, 2021 Update

On April 2, 2021, CDC released a new phase of the Framework for Conditional Sailing Order (issued October 30, 2020) for cruise ships operating or seeking to operate in U.S. waters. CDC published technical instructions for cruise ship operators and for local health authorities outlining this phase of the Conditional Sailing Order.

---

October 30, 2020 Update

On October 30, 2020, CDC issued a Framework for Conditional Sailing Order. This Order is effective upon signature and was published in the Federal Register on November 4, 2020.

 

This Order shall remain in effect until the earliest of

• The expiration of the Secretary of Health and Human Services’ declaration that COVID-19 constitutes a public health emergency,
• The CDC Director rescinds or modifies the order based on specific public health or other considerations, or
• November 1, 2021.

See the attached Order (print-only) pdf for the full requirements.

Previous No Sail Order for Cruise Ships

September 30, 2020 Update

On September 30, 2020, CDC extended the No Sail Order and Suspension of Further Embarkation; Third Modification and Extension of No Sail Order and Other Measures Related to Operations that was issued on July 16, 2020. The Order was effective upon signature and published in the Federal Register on October 5, 2020.

See the attached Order (print-only) pdf  for the full requirements.

---

July 16, 2020 Update

On July 16, 2020, CDC extended the No Sail Order and Suspension of Further Embarkation; Notice of Modification and Extension and Other Measures Related to Operations signed by the CDC Director on April 9, 2020—subject to the modifications and additional stipulated conditions as set forth in this Order. The Order was effective upon signature and published in the Federal Registerexternal icon on July 21, 2020.

See the attached Order (print-only) pdf  for the full requirements.

---

April 9, 2020 Update

On April 9, 2020, CDC renewed the No Sail Order and Other Measures Related to Operations Order signed by the CDC Director on March 14, 2020—subject to the modifications and additional stipulated conditions as set forth in this Order. The Order was published in the Federal Register and effective as of April 15, 2020.

See the attached Order (print-only) pdf for the full requirements.

---

March 14, 2020 Update

The CDC Director issued a No Sail Order for cruise ships effective March 14, 2020 due to the risk cruise ship travel introducing, transmitting, or spreading COVID-19. CDC commended the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA), the leading industry trade group, for their willingness to voluntarily suspend cruise ship operations from U.S. ports of call beginning on March 13, 2020 for the next thirty (30) days. The Order was published in the Federal Register.

See the attached Order (print-only) pdf for the full requirements.

[xpcdoojk]

1 hour ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

With all due respect, this statement is antithetical of just about everything I believe.

 

Thanks for bringing my signature quote to the thread

[D C]

2 hours ago, jaredhamburg said:

I find it dangerous to mandate a vaccine that is only approved for emergency use.  I am sorry for the loss of your mother.  I personally feel like doing what is "right" and "moral" should not be mandated.  Many people do not want to be vaccinated due to it not being fully approved and several examples of potential issues (pauses with the Astra Zeneca and J&J vaccines).

Mandated by whom?

A cruise line wanting to minimise illness and the potential for cruise disruption is perfectly in line requiring their customers be vaccinated.  It's for the benefit of them and their customers and offers the possibility of a cruise that is perfectly normal in every way.  People aren't required to vaccinate unless they want to partake in cruising. It's a personal decision/tradeoff.