5-year-olds soon have to show vaccine cards in San Francisco(politico.com)
politico.com
5-year-olds soon have to show vaccine cards in San Francisco
https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2021/11/03/5-year-olds-soon-have-to-show-vaccine-cards-in-san-francisco-1392237
11 コメント
Voting is a more fundamental right than going to a restaurant, because if you can vote then you can potentially change the laws about requiring an ID to visit a restaurant.
Also, there probably aren't many attempts to prevent 5 year olds from getting IDs, since the people in charge of issuing those IDs don't need to worry about 5 year olds voting them out.
Also, there probably aren't many attempts to prevent 5 year olds from getting IDs, since the people in charge of issuing those IDs don't need to worry about 5 year olds voting them out.
Seems like a stretch. I'd say access to food and employment are pretty high up on the list of important needs.
And 4 year olds will need to show their birth certificate in order to prove they are not in violation of a vaccine requirement.
SF claim: “Most COVID-19 infections are caused by people who have no symptoms of illness.”
https://www.sfdph.org/dph/alerts/files/C19-07-Safer-Return-T...
https://www.sfdph.org/dph/alerts/files/C19-07-Safer-Return-T...
> “As with children 12-17 who may not have personal identification, we will follow the same approach with the younger kids such that they would not be penalized for not having an ID,” a spokesperson from the department wrote in an email.
So parents just need to say "Sorry, my child doesn't have any photo ID" and they won't have to prove they've been vaccinated?
So parents just need to say "Sorry, my child doesn't have any photo ID" and they won't have to prove they've been vaccinated?
Yes, and their child won't get to enter the venue.
How many 5-year-olds have photo ID? Isn't this basically banning children from every public place?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what "they would not be penalized for not having an ID" means.
Given that this is an article about a YouTube video of a town hall, and that no final written declaration is available yet from the city, the only way to clear up everyone’s confusion here would be to watch the linked YouTube video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEXDdYKGee4
I haven’t done so, but I encourage anyone who does to report their findings with time index markers — and to watch the entire video, or read the entire transcript, rather than skimming and pull-quoting without context.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEXDdYKGee4
I haven’t done so, but I encourage anyone who does to report their findings with time index markers — and to watch the entire video, or read the entire transcript, rather than skimming and pull-quoting without context.
[deleted]
How is this policy not just as discriminatory as the other?