I've started to see social media posts from people who are now explaining that their company gave them a deadline to get vaccinated or leave, and that they've chosen to leave. Most say this sadly, but also with pride -- one of them, for example, noting that his decision was not from any high-minded principle, but just his "natural stubbornness," and in the end, he just didn't want to "be stupid."
Of course, just as it was his personal choice to not get a shot, it was also his personal choice to quit. He was given an option, not pressure. But then, pretty much all of life is a personal choice. And in this case, he chose "being stubborn." Which, he's right, is not particularly high-minded. In making his personal choice out of stubbornness, however, he also confused social responsibility with "being stupid." Which I'd suggest speaks loudly to his standards. On the other hand, a few weeks ago Delta Airlines told workers that those who were unvaccinated would be having their health insurance raised by $200 a month, since the program's costs were rising as a result of those not being vaccinated getting sick. Within the first two weeks, 4,000 employees (which is 20% of the unvaccinated workforce) already got vaccinated -- and none quit. So, that was their personal choice and social responsibility. I am sure that there are some valid reasons people may have for not getting the vaccine -- actual medical issues, or deep, lifelong religious convictions, or profound fear, perhaps. That's one thing. But as much as those quitting their jobs want to seem like they're making a great individual stand, I think there are very few high-minded reasons for quitting rather than getting vaccinated. Not because personal choice can't be high-minded -- it absolutely can be. But because in a worldwide pandemic of an infectious virus, from which 4,652,874 people have already died, that has mutated even more deadly and will mutate further, potentially rendering current vaccines ineffective, ignoring social responsibility removes almost any claim to nobility. Social responsibility is not a touchy-feeling, feel-good, kumbaya thing to sing about around the campfire. It's what everyone takes on the moment you step outside your home into the world. If one doesn't want to take on that social responsibility, that's fine, but then you're pretty much obligated to stay in your home or live in the forest alone or on a deserted island. Yes, people have every right to make another of their unending, daily personal choices and in doing so, ignore their social responsibility to the world around them. But you don't get to think that just because you are ignoring your social responsibility it therefore doesn't exist -- nor in making that personal choice do you get to think that you might not be causing harm to others to whom, as a member of the society you have entered, you owe that responsibility. Some matters of social responsibility are minor, and if we ignore them in exchange for our personal choice, the consequences are insignificant to the world around you. A worldwide pandemic with 226 million cases so far of deadly infection is not one of them. In not wanting to "be stupid," you most probably are not only the very definition, but also selfish and potentially a killer.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorRobert J. Elisberg is a political commentator, screenwriter, novelist, tech writer and also some other things that I just tend to keep forgetting. Feedspot Badge of Honor
Categories
All
|
© Copyright Robert J. Elisberg 2024
|