this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2025
236 points (98.8% liked)

Canada

10675 readers
429 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Canada just lost its measles-free status. So here’s the question..

If an unvaccinated child spreads measles to someone else’s kid, why shouldn’t the parents be liable in small-claims court?

I’m not talking about criminal charges, just basic responsibility. If your choice creates the risk you should have to prove you weren’t the reason someone else’s child got sick.

Is that unreasonable?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The most disturbing thing about reality is that we have morons opting their children and neighbors into preventable diseases because of absurd lies they read on Facebook.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl -3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Nah. It's not concerning that otherwise intelligent people can't figure out how to deal with their own lives without resorting to controlling others.

[–] howrar@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 days ago

Anyone have tips on how to not get stabbed without forcing other people to stop stabbing?

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] bastion@feddit.nl -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I'm absolutely for the rights of people to either have or refuse vaccines. Of course, in your mind, that probably just equates to being an anti-vaxxer. I get vaccines when it makes sense to me to do so, which doesn't include all vaccines.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, honestly you are an anti-vaxxer if your personal feelings (or crackpot theories) negatively affect your perception of vaccine science even slightly. What you're expressing here is an idea that has killed countless people and it will only get worse. Everyone should thank you for bringing back measles though, because your valiant freedom fighting "helped" us in that way.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl -1 points 6 days ago

Crackpot theories.. ..like.. ... how evolution works? ..or how regressive evolution works?

Diseases have killed countless people, and we have multiple vectors (and should have multiple vectors) for addressing them.

We have technology, as in vaccines. This is a good thing.

We have social behaviors including social pressure (which is, unfortunately, often compulsive and not well-aimed by the people that exercise it, but such is life).

We have individual immunity, and the direct biological pressure for health and general genetic robustness, which is also a good thing, even though it kills some of us.

the cool thing is, we're now at a point where there are lots of anti-vaxxers who are totally willing to throw their lives away for the benefit of the species. ..and, their surviving genetic lines and the rest of the species, as their children interbreed with the rest of humanity, will be better off for it. That's true, whether you like it or not. It's also true that forcing vaccination rather than simply providing and incentivizing vaccination is a terribly, terribly flawed strategy which causes far more issues than it fixes.

I understand that you're making social-pressure arguments, and that they are valid in the context you're in. But they aren't the end-all be-all, and they're not fundamentally scientific (or even logical) just because you're trying to support science by using them.

I also know this whole conversation brings up tons of uncomfortable topics, for which I'll probably get yelled at. I just don't care, because being more forceful about an argument, or getting the last word, really has no bearing on the truth of that word.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

To partake in society you have to accept societal contracts. One such contract is to not be a dick to others. If you don't vaccinate yourself against certain things, you are liable for spreading the disease. And thus you are being a dick. And thus you break the contract.

If you excuse yourself from society going forward though, I see no problem with your stance.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl -1 points 6 days ago

I reject societal contracts that do not support individual and body sovereignty. Of course, you can do with that as you will, because.. ..well.. ..sovereignty. Just know that if you take body sovereignty from people in one area, you empower the government to make decisions about your body, as well.

..and as we all have seen, the benevolence of the government is largely dependent on what party is in power, and what societal dynamics are in play. it's.. ..unreliable, at best.

I literally called it, the day Democrats started pushing forced vaccinations, that the Republicans would go for reversal of abortion law. ..and they fucking did, and they fucking succeeded in many ways, and that is direct consequence of permitting the government to violate body sovereignty, even when the voiced arguments do not pertain to it.

So, you can have your contiguous society, with forced social contracts rather than ones people actually are willing to agree to. ..and you'll also have the consequences, whether or not you can cognize how bad that will be right now.