In your world view they are selfish, in their world view you are.

People that got the jab, went out of their way to get it. It is unnatural, and therefore you have acted against the laws of nature.

In someone else's world view death and disease are completely natural, if we didn't have medicine or vaccines then there efforts are identical. They are simply living their life. They haven't gone out of their way and therefore they will always be in the right.

It all depends on the reasonings, the justifications and ultimately the perspectives you chose to see the world through. This is why I will not judge them, or demote them to stupid morons.

The difference being they're wrong. That's not opinion, that is fact. The more people vaccinated, the more the overall protection. To do the opposite (medical reasons excepted) is the very definition of being selfish.

, They can think any nonsense they want. People who are not vaccinated are more likely to occupy a bed in an ICU. The collaborative thing to do is to have the jab because vaccinations work only when many people have had them. This isn't an issue where both sides deserve equal weight. There's a right thing to do and there's claptrap.

I'm not demoting them, they're choosing to be morons. That has been true since they were refused admission to kindergarten for lack of vaccinations, continued through being refused admission to primary and high schools and applies to them being refused employment now.

I am, by the way, acting against the laws of nature today by going outside in clothes.

Again this is only true if your world view is that the hospitalization or death rate being at it's lowest is the most important thing in the world. To these arguments yes they are "wrong". That is not the only perspective or argument to be had.

Are you arguing for death? That a higher death rate is a good thing? This Jim Jones perspective rather goes against the history of human civilization.

I'm personally not but it is a legitimate argument, which does come up a lot in peoples personal belief systems, which is subsequently (in theory at least) covered under the Canadian charter.

Another argument against vaccination is medical, which is a doctor should not cause harm unless the risk benefit is completely known and understood.

These are all legitimate thoughts (not my own) but people do have the right to them.

So if their view favours something instead of the lives and health of others, how would you describe that?

I suppose one could argue it wasn't selfish if they knew of an impending threat to the world's population that involved death for people who had been vaccinated.

Or perhaps there's an argument that if people don't get vaccinated there will be more of those little round sticking plasters left.

You are responsible for your actions and not others.

Maybe look at it this way...We are in an environmental crisis which the UN has said is irreversible. Should we start banning you from driving, limiting your electrical usage, enforcing you to wear a mask that collects carbon dioxide for storage or burial...

Extreme I know but it is in the best interest of saving lives...

So these people, who are not you, who favour death, why don't they top themselves?

I'm thinking along the lines of a Jehovah witness that refuses a blood transfusion even though it's the only thing that'll keep them alive...Why don't these people top themselves?

So is that the plan for NZ from now on then?... no one in, no one out..? (without extensive quarantine and testing) how long does she plan to carry that on for? indefinitely? Covid is indefinite, so on that basis so should be the restrictions.

If they decline the blood transfusion they will have topped themselves. I don't have an issue with them being dead, only with them using a hospital. People who have chosen not to be vaccinated and who have covid should die at home. Alone.

Forgetting the last part their strange belief isn't impacting on someone else. In fact it's actually saving the supply for someone else.

New Zealand has been flexible like most places. They've also been better at it. Where they had restrictions that were initially stronger than others they made following those restrictions more practical.

Remember that while large parts of the world were in lockdown they were able to carry on with their lives almost normally. Perhaps you've forgotten that while "we" weren't even having football matches or, later, we were but there was nobody in attendance, New Zealand had full stadiums for Rugby internationals.

I don't know how accurate it is to say Covid is indefinite. It changes. If it settles to regular flu levels and we have vaccines then we can treat it as flu and not worry about it.

But right now it's more severe than flu in that it kills and hospitalises more people. The current variant is a lot more contagious than it was. The good thing is that it's apparently quite mild - except for the unfortunate few and the others that get long covid - but it's infecting such large numbers that the deaths and hospitalisations are not lowering. To allow, nay encourage, the spread seems the height of folly and that's even without considering the care people have gone without for other health issues while the health services are busy with covid patients.

If someone entered a coma from receiving the vaccine (has happened) can I argue that they shouldn't use the hospital because they injected it into themselves... (This is similar to how people feel about heroine users).

There's always multiple perspectives and like I said I'm truly not campaigning against the vaccine, I am vaccinated, I do want people to get vaccinated but we can do this without the bigotries.

and it doesn't matter that your belief is impacting on someone else.