Reclaim The Net accepts no advertising and is funded entirely by the community. If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture, and restoring privacy and civil liberties, please become a supporter here. Thank you. | Wear your support with this new social media censorship parody t-shirt.
Supporters can get this shirt at cost.
Become a supporter here.
Get the shirt directly here. |  | Germany is set to announce nationwide COVID-19 restrictions that translate to a de facto lockdown for those who refuse to show a vaccine passport.
The restrictions have already been implemented in some regions.
Related: How vaccine passports are crushing freedom, privacy, and civil liberties
Chancellor Olaf Scholz and outgoing Angela Merkel will meet with leaders from all regions to agree on the measures.
Scholz has refused to impose a new lockdown for everyone, but he is willing to impose stricter restrictions on those who refuse to show a passport.
The proposed measures, which were leaked to the press, suggest banning those who won't show a vaccine passport from non-essential stores and venues such as cinemas, restaurants, pubs, and gyms.
The chancellor and the regional leaders are expected to agree to extend the restrictions for the unvaccinated to the whole country. Those who don't show a vaccine passport will also "be subject to strict contact restrictions allowing a maximum of two households to meet."
In regions where they are still open, those who won't show a passport will not be allowed to go to the Christmas markets.
This news comes after Scholz agreed to put a nationwide vaccine mandate in parliament for a vote. He said a vaccine mandate would only be introduced after everyone has had a chance to get the shot, probably in February or March 2022.
Angela Merkel, who is seeing out her final days in politics, and speaking alongside incoming Chancellor Olaf Scholz, showed her support for the move, saying, "If I were in the Bundestag, I would vote for it."
Further measures include limiting public and private gatherings attended by those without a vaccine passport to a maximum of four people from no more than two households.
It is not exactly clear when the controversial measures will be introduced, though Merkel, in a press conference, referred to proposals as an "Advent Lockdown," suggesting the run-up to Christmas.
Temporary Health Minister Jens Spahn told the press that the country needed "a lockdown, so to speak, for the unvaccinated." | Reclaim The Net accepts no advertising and is funded entirely by the community. If you support free speech, the eradication of cancel culture and restoring privacy and civil liberties, please become a supporter here. |  | A federal court has blocked the Texas law that would have banned social media platforms from censoring content based on viewpoint.
We obtained a copy of the order for you here.
A similar law in Florida was also blocked.
Texas' HB 20, passed a few months ago, bans online platforms with over 50 million monthly active users from moderating content based on a users' viewpoint. The law focuses on restricting social platforms' ability to censor content, although it contains some provision to get illegal content removed faster.
Judge Robert Pitman granted an injunction filed by NetChoice and CCIA to put HB 20 on hold until the case is complete. The judge argues that the law violates the First Amendment rights of social media companies.
"HB 20's prohibitions on 'censorship' and constraints on how social media platforms disseminate content violate the First Amendment," the judge said. "Content moderation and curation will benefit users and the public by reducing harmful content and providing a safe, useful service," Pitman said, explaining why the injunction was beneficial.
"Social media platforms have a First Amendment right to moderate content disseminated on their platforms," Pitman added, citing three previous cases in the Supreme Court where the principle was upheld.
The judge insisted that the government cannot dictate what content a social media company is allowed or not allowed to publish.
"Private companies that use editorial judgment to choose whether to publish content — and, if they do publish content, use editorial judgment to choose what they want to publish — cannot be compelled by the government to publish other content."
According to the court, viewpoint discrimination can be deemed editorial discretion, which is a principle protected by the First Amendment.
"Without editorial discretion," the ruling reads, "social media platforms could not skew their platforms ideologically, as the state accuses of them of doing."
The law also requires large social media companies to provide detailed reports of their content moderation decisions. The court ruled that requirement is "inordinately burdensome given the unfathomably large numbers of posts on these sites and apps." | CURBING CIVIL LIBERTIES WITH NO BENEFITS |  | An inter-regional COVID committee in Spain concluded that controversial vaccine passports that create a checkpoint society have no impact on infections. They warned that vaccine passes pass the wrong message that vaccinated people do not spread the virus.
According to the report, obtained by El Pais (via The Telegraph), the experts analyzed the experiences of other countries in the region to arrive at the conclusion that the use of passports to access restaurants and other entertainment venues does not reduce the spread of the virus.
"In European countries where [the passports] is being used, cases are rising significantly, although it is true that their level of vaccination is much lower than in Spain," the report reads.
The report says that introducing vaccine passports in Spain would be negligible but the experts warned that vaccine passports might pass the wrong message that vaccinated people do not spread the virus.
"We know that around 40 per cent of those vaccinated are susceptible to infection and transmitting the infection," the report says.
According to the report, the only advantages of vaccine passports is increasing vaccine uptake by hesitants and reminding people of the danger of the pandemic.
The findings are similar to evidence found by the UK government - that vaccine passports could increase Covid rates in the country.
The government in Wales, UK, also found that, despite introducing vaccine passports, they could not find any evidence that they were working. |  | | French President Emanuel Macron announced new rules for the nationwide vaccine passport mandate. The vaccine passports of those above the age of 65 will be invalid if they have not gotten a booster shot.
The over 65s will have to keep up with their boosters or be locked out of society.
Macron announced new rules in a televised national address. Beginning December 15, the vaccine passports of people aged 65 and above will not be valid without a booster shot. At the time, that was the only age group eligible for booster shots, although the president said that beginning early December, the booster shots have began to roll out those aged 50 and above.
"If you have been vaccinated more than six months ago, I encourage you to book an appointment now," Macron said.
In France, booster shots became available for people aged 65 and above in September. Out of the eligible 7.7 million, 3.3 million had received the booster shot, at the time of the president's speech. The appointments for a booster shot spiked after the president's address.
|  | The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the American Medical Association (AMA) have collaborated to publish a language guide that advises medical professionals to avoid phrases such as "homeless," "handicapped," and "morbidly obese."
The move is thought to be a way to avoid social media backlash.
The guide, titled "Advancing Health Equity: A Guide to Language, Narrative and Concepts," recommended replacing those phrases with "people who are experiencing (condition or disability type)."
The guide recommends an "equity-focused alternative" to common terms. Medical professionals and students are advised to capitalize the word "Black," and to use lowercase for the word "white."
They are also told to use "social justice" instead of "fairness."
"Fairness is a hope for an outcome," the guide states. "In the legal system, one could say that each side in a trial having a lawyer to represent them is fair. But the justice system may favor the wealthy over the poor."
In a statement released late October, the AMA's president Gerald Harmon said: "The dominant narratives in American medicine and society reflect the values and interests of the historically more privileged socioeconomic groups—white, heterosexual, able-bodied, cisgendered, male, wealthy, English-speaking, Christian, U.S.-born."
In a previous statement, Philip Alberti, of the AAMC (an organization that represents medical schools), said: "Words matter. They matter because they have the power to perpetuate or to dismantle structural racism, to empower a person or to marginalize them, to reinforce a harmful traditional narrative or to provide an alternative one."
In recent years, learning institutions have been publishing language guides. For instance, in 2015, the University of New Hampshire published its "Bias Free" guide. Professional institutions have followed suit. In September the CDC released a "non-stigmatizing language guide."
The CDC's guide recommends replacing the phrase "alcoholic" with "persons with alcohol use disorder," and "smokers" with "people who smoke."
Like the AMA and AAMC guide, the CDC recommended replacing "homeless people" with "persons who are not securely housed" or "people experiencing homelessness." | We appreciate your support. | | Thanks for reading,
Reclaim The Net
| | | |
No comments:
Post a Comment