News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified. Parent comment

Re:Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified by Volundr on Sunday November 21, 2021 @01:07PM (#29298273)
How does a BMI of over 30 put other workers at risk? These situations are not analogous. And unless Alabama has a far more strict proposal than the proposed federal mandate, no one is requiring unvaccinated workers be fired, only they be tested weekly, so the analogy breaks down on that front as well.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified by josephcsible on Sunday November 21, 2021 @01:31PM (#29298490)
> How does a BMI of over 30 put other workers at risk?

How do unvaccinated people who work from home put other workers at risk?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified by Volundr on Sunday November 21, 2021 @02:01PM (#29298744)
I didn't say that they did? You've ignored the entire content of my comment to engage with an argument I didn't make.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified by josephcsible on Sunday November 21, 2021 @08:18PM (#29301619)
You said the situations weren't analogous. I'm saying they are, because firing an unvaccinated remote worker doesn't make anyone else any safer than firing an obese remote worker does.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Covid-19: stigmatising the unvaccinated is not justified by Volundr on Sunday November 21, 2021 @08:34PM (#29301737)
Except most workers aren't remote workers, and as stated in my original comment that you chose to ignore, there is no mandate that anyone be fired for being unvaccinated.

So being unvaccinated is risky to others around you while having a high BMI is not, and you suggested firing employees with a high BMI, while the mandate only calls for testing unvaccinated employees.

So again, the analogy falls apart two different ways.

[ Parent | on HN ]