Great!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:with 85% vaccinated in MoCo, it’s pretty much just babies 0-5 who will not be able to get a passport. Do we really need vaccine passports to identify who is not a baby?

This one would be for 12+. Supposedly it's because we have so many international and out of town visitors here. So it's to protect people who are already vaccinated, many of them boosted, too.....Wait a minute....

Exactly. Who exactly is this to ‘protect’?? We need a vaccine passport in the name of public safety? GTFO. Is the intention of a vaccine passport to protect the vaccinated??

If individual businesses want to require vaccine passports because they think it will help business, more power to them. But a County-wide provision? Not on your life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am vaccinated and boostered and I wear a mask but something about a vaccine passport, showing proof, doesn’t sit well with me. How will it be enforced? Is my passport going to be scanned at businesses? Will this information be reported back to a government entity? Is it just theater?

This. And it's just another way to hurt businesses. Let them police their own business the way they want.

Elrich thinks this won’t hurt businesses because a vaccinated person won’t leave MoCo to shop elsewhere. He is SO wrong.

I am so against this. I will absolutely drive up to Frederick for restaurants/bars. Already, they have no mask mandate. I’m vaccinated, but he shouldn’t underestimate how much people will dislike this kind of crazy BS.

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm a Democrat and boosted but I think programs like this really have to be looked at critically. What benefit does it provide when mostly everyone is vaccinated? Why don't they first figure out how to get testing in schools instead? I don't really give a shit whether a handful of people in Giant are not vaccinated. When did we becoming so trusting of government? Where does it end? It sets a bad precedent. One day the precedent will be used to justify something the left doesn't approve it. I guarantee it.

So much this. Look at the Patriot Act.

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm a Democrat and boosted but I think programs like this really have to be looked at critically. What benefit does it provide when mostly everyone is vaccinated? Why don't they first figure out how to get testing in schools instead? I don't really give a shit whether a handful of people in Giant are not vaccinated. When did we becoming so trusting of government? Where does it end? It sets a bad precedent. One day the precedent will be used to justify something the left doesn't approve it. I guarantee it.

+1 million

Though I used to be a Democrat and can’t support this nonsense anymore. It is terrifying to me that they are even considering this.

Anonymous wrote:with 85% vaccinated in MoCo, it’s pretty much just babies 0-5 who will not be able to get a passport. Do we really need vaccine passports to identify who is not a baby?

LOL!

I think it’s over 90%+ vaccinated for adults. Or at least that was the stat as of a few months ago.

I guess we need to keep those impure, unvaxxed babies out of the gym. Wait, what?

Anonymous wrote:Look, I'm a Democrat and boosted but I think programs like this really have to be looked at critically. What benefit does it provide when mostly everyone is vaccinated? Why don't they first figure out how to get testing in schools instead? I don't really give a shit whether a handful of people in Giant are not vaccinated. When did we becoming so trusting of government? Where does it end? It sets a bad precedent. One day the precedent will be used to justify something the left doesn't approve it. I guarantee it.

One million times agree with this.

Punishment for doing the right thing. The more you do the more requirements and restrictions. Just like I got my kids vaccinated and MCPS will cave to MCEA pressure to go virtual. People are tired of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t support any business that enforces this terrible form of discrimination

I am 99% sure you're being facetious, but hard to tell these days.

It is quite literally discrimination based on medical history. Separating society into two classes has historically proven a really, really bad idea and I won’t support it.

No, it isn't discrimination based on medical history (and the suggestion that it is is frankly offensive to people who actually are disabled or have medical histories that can leave them subject to discrimination).

It's discrimination based on a choice. And guess what? Society wouldn't function without that kind of discrimination.

We "discriminate" against people who don't educate their kids, or pay taxes, or drive drunk, or do 10 million other things.

You can dance around with semantics all you want. A business refusing service to a person based on their medical history is discrimination. Those are the facts. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.

Schools do this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t support any business that enforces this terrible form of discrimination

I am 99% sure you're being facetious, but hard to tell these days.

It is quite literally discrimination based on medical history. Separating society into two classes has historically proven a really, really bad idea and I won’t support it.

No, it isn't discrimination based on medical history (and the suggestion that it is is frankly offensive to people who actually are disabled or have medical histories that can leave them subject to discrimination).

It's discrimination based on a choice. And guess what? Society wouldn't function without that kind of discrimination.

We "discriminate" against people who don't educate their kids, or pay taxes, or drive drunk, or do 10 million other things.

You can dance around with semantics all you want. A business refusing service to a person based on their medical history is discrimination. Those are the facts. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.

My feelings aren't hurt.

You seem really pleased with your idea of calling vaccination status "medical history." I think your thinking may be that "medical history" connotes an involuntary class, and/or a protected category? In any case, choosing to get a vaccine or not is not "history," it's a presenst-tense choice. If you want to be in the other category, you can join it today.

Again, the vaccine passport that's being proposed in MOCO is NOT a mandate, so this forum isn't really the place for this post. But for argument's sake, let's say we're talking about DC's bar/restaurant mandate. If a democratically elected government decides that it's in the interest of public health to require vaccination for voluntary activities such as going to a bar or restaurant, you have a bunch of choices: 1) You can decide that remaining unvaccinated is more important to you than patronizing bars and restaurants, and that's your choice. 2) You can decide that it's more important for you to go to bars and restaurants, so you can get a vaccine. 3) You can work to elect officials who agree with you and pass different laws. 4) If that's not possible, you can move to a place where your views are in the majority.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am vaccinated and boostered and I wear a mask but something about a vaccine passport, showing proof, doesn’t sit well with me. How will it be enforced? Is my passport going to be scanned at businesses? Will this information be reported back to a government entity? Is it just theater?

This. And it's just another way to hurt businesses. Let them police their own business the way they want.

Y'all are confusing two things. Your argument is against the vax mandate DC has announced.

This thread is about a vax passport that allows business or other entities (doctor's offices, private schools, employers, whatever) that want or need to check vax status to do so easily--and decreases chance of faked cards. IT'S NOT ABOUT A MANDATE. go to the other thread for that.

That's not what MoCo is talking about though. Theirs would be a mandate at certain businesses, not something that benefits the businesses.
https://www.mymcmedia.org/montgomery-county-to-propose-covid-19-vaccine-passport/

read the article again. it's discussing BOTH the moco thing and the DC thing and it makes clear that they are separate and that the DC thing is a mandate.

The fact that it is focused on proving you had one dose when the current recommendation is for a third dose/booster is all you need to know. Total political theater. A huge amount of money wasted and hurting business to check that someone had an insecure dosage of the vaccine!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am vaccinated and boostered and I wear a mask but something about a vaccine passport, showing proof, doesn’t sit well with me. How will it be enforced? Is my passport going to be scanned at businesses? Will this information be reported back to a government entity? Is it just theater?

This. And it's just another way to hurt businesses. Let them police their own business the way they want.

Y'all are confusing two things. Your argument is against the vax mandate DC has announced.

This thread is about a vax passport that allows business or other entities (doctor's offices, private schools, employers, whatever) that want or need to check vax status to do so easily--and decreases chance of faked cards. IT'S NOT ABOUT A MANDATE. go to the other thread for that.

That's not what MoCo is talking about though. Theirs would be a mandate at certain businesses, not something that benefits the businesses.
https://www.mymcmedia.org/montgomery-county-to-propose-covid-19-vaccine-passport/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I won’t support any business that enforces this terrible form of discrimination

I am 99% sure you're being facetious, but hard to tell these days.

It is quite literally discrimination based on medical history. Separating society into two classes has historically proven a really, really bad idea and I won’t support it.

No, it isn't discrimination based on medical history (and the suggestion that it is is frankly offensive to people who actually are disabled or have medical histories that can leave them subject to discrimination).

It's discrimination based on a choice. And guess what? Society wouldn't function without that kind of discrimination.

We "discriminate" against people who don't educate their kids, or pay taxes, or drive drunk, or do 10 million other things.

You can dance around with semantics all you want. A business refusing service to a person based on their medical history is discrimination. Those are the facts. Sorry if it hurts your feelings.

Look, I'm a Democrat and boosted but I think programs like this really have to be looked at critically. What benefit does it provide when mostly everyone is vaccinated? Why don't they first figure out how to get testing in schools instead? I don't really give a shit whether a handful of people in Giant are not vaccinated. When did we becoming so trusting of government? Where does it end? It sets a bad precedent. One day the precedent will be used to justify something the left doesn't approve it. I guarantee it.