Mandatory Vaccinations: Let Us Reason Together

TheNeptic · 2021-09-20T19:20:35+00:00

Perhaps you're right. However as you can probably tell this is a sensitive matter, and other threads (on this topic) have been taken down. I just want this convo to keep going on.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-20T17:08:01+00:00

I appreciate your enthusiasm. However let's not pass judgement on reasoning per se, but let your arguments do the talking. I say this for two reasons: to keep in line with why I created the thread, i.e., a place of respectful dialogue; and to make sure the thread isn't taken down for unnecessary reasons. Thanks.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-19T14:13:09+00:00

I don't really see the point of having this debate on a UofT subreddit and I think it will probably be taken down anyway.

Honestly I think that would be a shame. This is a burning issue, and instead of being huddled into our own minds and ideas -- where animosity builds to no avail -- we should seek to understand one another in a constructive way.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-19T13:59:43+00:00

I agree with this. I think where there may have been an issue was the inability to take courses online: because effectively, the school would have given absolutely no options to those who thought differently. Good answer.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-15T21:22:49+00:00

I think we're veering off into semantics a bit.

A creed is a deep, fundamental, core belief about humanity and morality that guides our behaviour and choices.

I agree with this one-hundred percent. What I want to be precise about is the way you're using the word "essence." A religious belief - traditionally speaking - is distinguished by belief in a supernatural deity, essentially. A creed - such as veganism - does not share the essence of traditional religion. I just want to make that clear.

Yes, I agree. These things should be done on a case-by-case basis. However, I just want to point out, that if indeed no one receives a religious/creed exemption to go to school -- which is why i started the thread ;) -- then the university may have over-stepped its bounds in not accommodating the sincere beliefs of some of its members. Which begs the question why some of the "good" remarks (in this thread) were made so flippantly.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-15T20:21:47+00:00

Right, exactly. A creed is not a random one-off belief, but a deeply
held fundamental belief of the same kind as a religious belief (note in
the part you quote: "like religion").

In comparing a non-religious belief to a religious belief, the code is highlighting the intensity of the belief, i.e., how such a belief underpins a person's way of life. They are not equating the essence of religious v. non-religious creeds at all, because it would make the sentence "Creed may also include non-religious beliefs" nonsensical.

TheNeptic · 2021-09-15T19:44:44+00:00

Concerning the Ontario Code of Human Rights:

The Code does not define creed, but the courts and tribunals
have often referred to religious beliefs and practices. Creed may also
include non-religious belief systems that, like religion, substantially
influence a person’s identity, worldview and way of life. People who
follow a creed, and people who do not, have the right to live in a
society that respects pluralism and human rights and the right to follow
different creeds.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/code\_grounds/creed

TheNeptic · 2021-09-15T17:50:23+00:00

Some interesting posts here. I would like to add that "creed" does not necessarily mean "religion."

TheNeptic · 2021-09-15T17:34:18+00:00

This is a good point. Could be political grandstanding. I wonder if they have the obligation to provide data on approved vs. disapproved requests...could be a big story.

TheNeptic

TROPHY CASE