A Montreal restaurant worker says she was forced to quit after her boss told her she can’t wear a mask at work. The restaurant says it doesn't require worker...
Sorry if the video is sensational. I wanted to talk about something this brought to mind.
Everyone in the video talks about wearing masks as a form of self-protection, and whether we should have a right to do that or whether our employers should be able to tell us not to do that. But I don’t wear a mask to protect myself. I wear a mask against the much larger effects it prevents in others. If it was just about me I’d probably never wear a mask unless somebody made me, and I’d resent the hell out of it. Do we have a right to protect others?
This is Quebec. In Quebec, it is illegal to fail to render aid to someone whose life requires it. Doesn’t that give people an obligation to wear a mask?
This is Quebec. In Quebec, it is illegal to fail to render aid to someone whose life requires it. Doesn’t that give people an obligation to wear a mask?
Quebec is bipolar with their laws. They have animal protection laws that consider some animals sentient (and not personal property. i.e. “pets”) but excludes other sentient animals from the same law (i.e. farmed animals, which are often the most abused)…
I think the human rights person in the video is right that wearing a mask should be protected under human right laws.
Huh, TIL… I knew you couldn’t be blamed for injuring someone while trying to help (for example, crack a rib while attempting CPR), but I did not know you absolutely had to help. I also learned that if you get injured helping someone, you can take that person to court for compensation.
In Quebec, it is illegal to fail to render aid to someone whose life requires it. Doesn’t that give people an obligation to wear a mask?
By that argument we would be legally obligated to murder all bees and ban peanut butter, since some people are deadly allergic to them. We don’t want to be responsible for their death, do we?
How so? I sincerely don’t see how it can be argued that Jane Public deciding not to wear a mask these days could be construed as “not rendering aid”. It’s a massive stretch.
Sorry if the video is sensational. I wanted to talk about something this brought to mind.
Everyone in the video talks about wearing masks as a form of self-protection, and whether we should have a right to do that or whether our employers should be able to tell us not to do that. But I don’t wear a mask to protect myself. I wear a mask against the much larger effects it prevents in others. If it was just about me I’d probably never wear a mask unless somebody made me, and I’d resent the hell out of it. Do we have a right to protect others?
This is Quebec. In Quebec, it is illegal to fail to render aid to someone whose life requires it. Doesn’t that give people an obligation to wear a mask?
That’s a very good point with the last question there, especially if you’re ill.
Quebec is bipolar with their laws. They have animal protection laws that consider some animals sentient (and not personal property. i.e. “pets”) but excludes other sentient animals from the same law (i.e. farmed animals, which are often the most abused)…
I think the human rights person in the video is right that wearing a mask should be protected under human right laws.
I wasn’t aware of special rights for pets in Quebec. I’ll look into that, it’s interesting to me.
Happened a while ago.
“…requires that pets receive care consistent with their biological needs. Farm animals don’t get same protection as pets.” 🙄
Ignoring everything else, this is an interesting moral dilemma.
Huh, TIL… I knew you couldn’t be blamed for injuring someone while trying to help (for example, crack a rib while attempting CPR), but I did not know you absolutely had to help. I also learned that if you get injured helping someone, you can take that person to court for compensation.
By that argument we would be legally obligated to murder all bees and ban peanut butter, since some people are deadly allergic to them. We don’t want to be responsible for their death, do we?
No, but you would be legally obligated to avoid and disclose any possible cross contamination from allergens (like we already do)
Then it logically would be sufficient to disclose that you are not wearing a mask, which we already do (visually).
This is a terrible strawman argument. Go away.
How so? I sincerely don’t see how it can be argued that Jane Public deciding not to wear a mask these days could be construed as “not rendering aid”. It’s a massive stretch.
You’re not going to get rational answers from the emotional crowd, I’m afraid.
deleted by creator