内容

中英对照: 拒绝疫苗者:我的身体我做主
Personal liberty is on the back burner in the face of grave public health threat

 
 
信奉“医疗自由”的疫苗反对者们拒绝接种能有效抑制疫情的新冠疫苗,声称拒绝接种是他们理所当然的法律权力,并高呼“我的身体我做主”的口号。当然,这种选择是会有后果的。当强制疫苗接种等公共健康规定对他们的行动自由采取了进一步限制,气愤的反疫苗势力在各大城市发起抗议,表达对限制其个人权力和自由的疫苗政策之强烈不满。这些声势浩大的反疫苗抗议行动向人们提出一个迫在眉睫的问题,既在广泛爆发的新冠疫情面前,每一名个体成员能有多大的自由和权力选择的空间?

Believing they are entitled to medical freedom, vaccine opponents refuse the vaccine effective to suppress Covid outbreaks. They advocate for their “natural and legal” right not to get jabbed, chanting the slogan “my body, my choice.” But their choice may have consequences. When public health measures, including mandatory vaccines, have further restricted their rights, raged vaccine deniers have rallied across the cities, expressing their profound dissatisfaction over the loss of their rights and freedom. The vocal right protests against the vaccination have prompted the question --how far can personal choice go at the critical moment of a public health crisis?

今天你也许关心的话题:
 
 
想要阅读与本文有关的话题?请点击本文末的链接!
 


疫情战争的胜利往往是以牺牲各人自由和公民权力为代价的。在疫情危机面前,公共安全的重要性远远胜过个体的权利和利益。为了公众利益和大众的生命,省级政府都被赋予了特殊的权利,制定了从紧急封城到社交隔离令和强制疫苗接种等各种政策对个体自由加以限制。据法律专家表示,在紧急健康状态下宣布合理及时的公共健康措施是经得起宪章条款考验的。虽然说强行为个体注射疫苗是违法的,但限制那些执意拒绝接种者的自由却是符合宪章条款的。

Achievement in public health often carries a price in individual freedom, rendering civil rights in a fragile state. During a pandemic emergency, public safety takes priority over individual rights. To serve the common good and protect people's lives, provincial governments take on a new power, resorting to policies restricting personal choices -- from the emergency lockdown to social distancing orders to mandatory vaccinations. According to legal experts, reasonable and adequate public health measures can withstand Charter scrutiny. While forcing Covid-19 vaccine injection flies in the face of the law, limiting the freedom of those who willfully refuse the jab is entirely constitutional.
 
一些看重保护各人权利和自由的省政府都曾尽力避免限制性措施,或拒绝实施疫苗护照制度。但拥挤的急救病房和疲惫不堪的医疗工作者将疫情的严峻疫情现实展现在他们面前,使他们不得不放弃曾一度倡导的反限制措施的立场。今年六月,阿尔伯塔省曾取消了大部分疫情限制措施,包括佩戴口罩,接触跟踪要求以及室内聚会禁令等,以庆祝在向重获个人自由的历程上所迈的一大步。但这种不受限制的自由却在短期内消失殆尽。随着德尔塔毒株感染人数和住院率的飙升,阿省政府为了控制疫情泛滥不得不重操限令旧业,宣布从晚10点宵禁到强制一线工作者接种疫苗等一系列措施再次对各人自由加以限制。

Some provincial governments valuing civil rights and freedom had once eschewed restrictive measures and disavowed the vaccine passport system. But the stark reality of the Covid crisis – from the cramped ICUs and burnt-out healthcare workers has forced them to budge from their anti-restriction stance. In June, the Alberta government lifted most Covid-19 restrictions -- from the mask and contact tracing requirements to indoor gathering ban, celebrating “a huge step towards regained freedom and personal liberty.”  But the unrestricted freedom was short-lived. As Delta variant cases and hospitalization rates soared, the government has no choice but to adopt a slew of measures that again put restraints on individual liberty – from a 10 pm curfew to mandatory vaccination for frontline workers – to stem off rapidly escalating outbreaks.



安省省长福特也曾一度为保护少数群体权利而拒绝强制疫苗政策。但第四波疫情浪潮的到来也迫使他在疫苗护照问题上采取了180度大转弯。本月初,福特宣布了一项“新冠强化疫苗证书”制度,严格限制了未接种疫苗者的私人和社交活动,禁止他们在餐馆就餐,并造访健身房和电影院等场所。面对潜在的公共健康之威胁,个人自由无从谈起。福特省长宣布疫苗护照时表示:“我们需要不惜一切代价保护医院,避免封城的局面。我们希望孩子们能正常上学,企业能正常运转。”

Ontario Premier Doug Ford had earlier rejected the vaccination mandate to protect the rights of a minority group. But the rising tide of the fourth wave has forced him to do a complete U-turn on the vaccine passport. Early this month, Ford announced an “enhanced Covid-19 vaccine certificate system”, which imposes severe restrictions on personal and social activities for the unvaccinated, banning their visit to restaurants, gyms, and movie theaters. In the face of potential grave public threats, individual liberty is on the back burner. “We need to protect our hospitals; we need to avoid lockdowns at all costs. We want our kids in schools and our business to stay open,” said the Premier during the announcement.
 
意识到在国家紧急状态面前,个人权利和自由从于次要地位的加国法庭也倾向于服从那些为公众利益而限制了个人自由的卫生当局的指令措施。纽芬兰和拉布拉多最高法院去年裁定,该省政府可以合法地规定限制旅行政策,包括全面禁止来自它省非必要的旅游者进入该省。这一判决为那些寻求疫情旅游限制的其他省府提供了法律指南。

Recognizing the fragility of civil rights in times of national emergency, Canadian courts tend to defer to public health authorities that have curbed individual liberty in the public interest. The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court ruled last year that the province can lawfully impose restrictions on interprovincial travel, including a complete entry ban for non-essential travelers from other areas. The ruling has served as a legal guideline for provincial governments seeking Covid-19 travel restrictions.  



拒绝接种疫苗是愚蠢并危险的。未接种疫苗者将自己置于被感染和死于新冠的高风险之中,同时也给更广泛的公众构成严重危险。在疫情危机威胁着数千万人的生命之际,政府采取干预措施以提高疫苗接种率并采取严厉措施遏制拒绝者的公民自由是完全必要且合理的。
 
To refuse vaccines is foolish and dangerous. The unvaccinated put themselves at high risks of getting infected and dying from Covid while imposing grave danger to a broader public. Government interventions to boost vaccination uptake and draconian measures to curb the rejecters’ civil liberty are necessary and justified at a time when a public health crisis puts tens of millions of lives at stake.
   

我们鼓励所有读者在我们的文章和博客上分享意见。We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. Visit the FAQ page for more information.

验证码
请输入验证码