DC drops indoor mask and vaccine mandates tomorrow

[Anonymous]

So dumb that the mask requirement isn’t also effective immediately. I can handle a mask for a quick jaunt into Giant (though I look forward to not having to), but masking at the gym is terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some people are so blinded by polarizing gang warfare of team blue and team red, that they don't want to admit a lot of the lockdowns and requirements of the past two years were ineffectual. Biden was not able to end COVID, and that was a fantastical goal that didn't align with science. They can't bring themselves to realize that a lot of what Republicans pushed months ago is what democratic governors and politicians finally realized too : we can't let this virus define our lives forever. People have to make personal choices about their own risk tolerances and for vaccinated people the risks are comparable to the flu.

There have been almost no actual lockdowns here, if we're going to get technical about terms -- the stay home orders always had a ton of exceptions, and at any rate, all that has been lifted for a very long time anyway. "You have to wear a mask in public" is not the same as "you can't leave your house."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

No I'm not the reason. The government making these mandates are the reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

No I'm not the reason. The government making these mandates are the reason.

You aren't actually REQUIRED to refuse to patronize restaurants that are complying with government orders.

[Anonymous]

So is there anyone who thinks that it is a good idea that the vaccine and mask mandates are being dropped but the mask mandate is still being kept in schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

They didn't need to ask for proof you had a measles shot because they assumed that at some point, you went to school, which required you to be vaccinated against measles. And unlike covid, that shot confers pretty much lifelong immunity. If you had measles, though, I'd be pretty psyched if you weren't eating in the same restaurant I was in.

Well, then they can just "assume" that all their customers had the Covid vaccine then too, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So is there anyone who thinks that it is a good idea that the vaccine and mask mandates are being dropped but the mask mandate is still being kept in schools?

No one with a lick of sense or reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some people are so blinded by polarizing gang warfare of team blue and team red, that they don't want to admit a lot of the lockdowns and requirements of the past two years were ineffectual. Biden was not able to end COVID, and that was a fantastical goal that didn't align with science. They can't bring themselves to realize that a lot of what Republicans pushed months ago is what democratic governors and politicians finally realized too : we can't let this virus define our lives forever. People have to make personal choices about their own risk tolerances and for vaccinated people the risks are comparable to the flu.

There have been almost no actual lockdowns here, if we're going to get technical about terms -- the stay home orders always had a ton of exceptions, and at any rate, all that has been lifted for a very long time anyway. "You have to wear a mask in public" is not the same as "you can't leave your house."

I can’t believe there are still people yelling “real lockdowns haven’t been tried.” What is your end goal here? Zero Covid isn’t a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

DP. I feel bad for the restaurants, sure. But, I'm not going to patronize them if I find the jurisdiction's laws offensive.

Would you go to a restaurant in a city where the laws required a certain ethnic or racial group to sit only in the basement room and use separate restrooms?

Oh come on. Race and ethnicity are not a choice. Choosing not to get a vaccine IS a choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

DP. I feel bad for the restaurants, sure. But, I'm not going to patronize them if I find the jurisdiction's laws offensive.

Would you go to a restaurant in a city where the laws required a certain ethnic or racial group to sit only in the basement room and use separate restrooms?

Oh come on. Race and ethnicity are not a choice. Choosing not to get a vaccine IS a choice.

We all draw our lines at different places.

Okay, then. Religion is a choice. Based on your post, I assume you'd be okay with a city ordinance that required a specific religious group to eat outside and only use a port-o-potty at restaurants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

DP. I feel bad for the restaurants, sure. But, I'm not going to patronize them if I find the jurisdiction's laws offensive.

Would you go to a restaurant in a city where the laws required a certain ethnic or racial group to sit only in the basement room and use separate restrooms?

Oh come on. Race and ethnicity are not a choice. Choosing not to get a vaccine IS a choice.

We all draw our lines at different places.

Okay, then. Religion is a choice. Based on your post, I assume you'd be okay with a city ordinance that required a specific religious group to eat outside and only use a port-o-potty at restaurants?

No of course not, because there would be no rational reason for a city to do that. There IS a rational reason (even if you don't agree with it) to require people to be vaccinated when vaccines are freely available and there is a pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some people are so blinded by polarizing gang warfare of team blue and team red, that they don't want to admit a lot of the lockdowns and requirements of the past two years were ineffectual. Biden was not able to end COVID, and that was a fantastical goal that didn't align with science. They can't bring themselves to realize that a lot of what Republicans pushed months ago is what democratic governors and politicians finally realized too : we can't let this virus define our lives forever. People have to make personal choices about their own risk tolerances and for vaccinated people the risks are comparable to the flu.

There have been almost no actual lockdowns here, if we're going to get technical about terms -- the stay home orders always had a ton of exceptions, and at any rate, all that has been lifted for a very long time anyway. "You have to wear a mask in public" is not the same as "you can't leave your house."

I know. It's been so disappointing that the government couldn't lock people in their homes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

DP. I feel bad for the restaurants, sure. But, I'm not going to patronize them if I find the jurisdiction's laws offensive.

Would you go to a restaurant in a city where the laws required a certain ethnic or racial group to sit only in the basement room and use separate restrooms?

Oh come on. Race and ethnicity are not a choice. Choosing not to get a vaccine IS a choice.

We all draw our lines at different places.

Okay, then. Religion is a choice. Based on your post, I assume you'd be okay with a city ordinance that required a specific religious group to eat outside and only use a port-o-potty at restaurants?

Nope. Most people are born into a religion. Those who discriminate against them don’t care if they choose to be religious or not. You’re really comparing getting a vaccine to a religion? Choosing not to get a vaccine outs everyone around you at risk and is selfish. Being a member of a religion should only effects you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they doing this? The vax mandate was great

It destroys small businesses, especially restaurants.

Why, though? Most of DC is vaccinated, and this should encourage those who aren't to get vaccinated.

No. It encourages people (including those who are vaccinated) to not patronize businesses.

I'm vaccinated, and very much against mandates. I won't eat in a restaurant that requires a vaccine. That's absurd--three years ago no restaurant was asking to see proof of a measles shot before they'd let me eat.

So then you're the reason that small businesses suffer - you wouldn't eat in a restaurant when there was a vaccine mandate that they were legally required to adhere to? This wasn't a choice made by individual restaurants - though now it will be - it was a decision made by the city.

DP. I feel bad for the restaurants, sure. But, I'm not going to patronize them if I find the jurisdiction's laws offensive.

Would you go to a restaurant in a city where the laws required a certain ethnic or racial group to sit only in the basement room and use separate restrooms?

Oh come on. Race and ethnicity are not a choice. Choosing not to get a vaccine IS a choice.

We all draw our lines at different places.

Okay, then. Religion is a choice. Based on your post, I assume you'd be okay with a city ordinance that required a specific religious group to eat outside and only use a port-o-potty at restaurants?

No of course not, because there would be no rational reason for a city to do that. There IS a rational reason (even if you don't agree with it) to require people to be vaccinated when vaccines are freely available and there is a pandemic.

Okay, you're fine with discriminating against people so long as you consider the reasoning behind it "rational."

Even though there's no real evidence that vaccine mandates make any difference.

[Anonymous]

I think one reason the vaccine mandate was dropped is that from a constitutional perspective, it is unlikely to withstand a legal challenge. This is especially true if case rates have dropped. This isn't a right/left thing or even a "follow the science" thing. It is just very hard to mandate a medical intervention on adults without compelling public health justification. During the height of the omicron surge you MAYBE would have had this (but opposition would have pointed to low death rates and the fact that vaccinate people were also catching and spreading the virus, though not as readily as the unvaccinated), but by March of 2022, it would be virtually impossible to defend a vaccine mandate against a legal challenge.

I was explaining this to my DH and his first response was "but we mandate vaccines in schools" and I know some of you will say the same. This is different because children have more limited rights in schools than adults do. Schools can do a lot of things that would normally violate fundamental rights to things like free speech, against unlawful search and seizure, or freedom of movement. The case law on constitutional rights is very different for kids and particularly different in public schools.

I could see Bowser looking a the cases plummeting, the low rates of covid+ people in hospitals, and the very low death rate related to covid, and being told by legal advisors that there is no longer a strong case for the vaccine. It feels premature, but when I look at this as it would be presented in court case, it's actually somewhat remarkable they ever tried it. And it gets less viable every day.