New Alberta, Canada, Premier Claims Unvaccinated Are ‘The Most Discriminated Against Group’

Danielle Smith just became the new Premier of Alberta, the fourth largest province in Canada. And during her first media availability, Smith spoke about protecting people against discrimination. Did she mean discrimination based on race, ethnicity, other physical characteristics, disabilities, gender, or sexual orientation? Nope. Smith chose to talk about the “unvaccinated,” claiming that “They have been the most discriminated against group that I’ve ever witnessed in my lifetime.” Yes, that’s exactly what she said, as you can see in the video accompanying the following tweet from Courtney Theriault, a reporter for CityNews Edmonton:

Smith indicated that she plans to protect the “unvaccinated” under Alberta’s Human Rights Act. She went on to assert that, “I don’t think I’ve ever experienced a situation in my lifetime where a person was fired from their job, or not allowed to watch their kids play hockey, or are not allowed to go visit a loved one in long-term care or hospital, or not allowed to go get on a plane to either go across the country to see family or even travel across the border.”

Really? The most discriminated against? A number of folks on social media indicated that something was a-miss with Smith’s assertion. For example, Jennifer Howard, the Chief of Staff Leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party, wrote, “Somehow I missed the part of the pandemic where unvaccinated people weren’t allowed to marry the person they love. Or own property in their own name. Or vote. Or have clean water,” in the following tweet:

And Charles Adler, who’s hosted various radio and TV shows including “The Charles Adler Show” on SiriusXM Canada asked “how do you live on this planet in this century and miss every freaking frame of every scene” in this tweet:

Meanwhile, Jamie Boisvenue, MSc, and epidemiologist and PhD student at the University of Alberta School of Public Health, highlighted another “miss” or perhaps a “mis” in what Smith had said, posting that “she clearly has a gross misunderstanding of systemic racism over the last…checks notes…entire course of human history,” as you can see below:

Then there was the key “choice” distinction that Tim Caulfield, LLB, LLM, Professor of Law at the University of Alberta pointed out in the following tweet:

As Caulfield indicated above, ultimately most of the “unvaccinated” have chosen not get vaccinated despite recommendations from public health experts based on scientific evidence. (There are some people who have clear documented medical reasons for not being able to get a vaccine. But they do not tend to comprise the majority of the unvaccinated.) Assuming that you do not have a clear, documented, and scientifically-verified reason to not get a vaccine, choosing to stay unvaccinated is not the same as something that you can’t readily change like your skin color (not that you should necessarily want to change your skin color.) On a given day, a person can’t simply decide, “I am going to make myself look less like [insert racial or ethnic minority here] today so that I don’t face as much discrimination.” Or “hmmm, maybe if I just hide the fact that I am considered a person of color, maybe I’ll be able to get that job, that position, that opportunity, that house, those friends, or the stuffing not kicked out of me.” Or “I will choose to not be a woman so that I will not get harassed.” Or “I have got to choose to not have this disability.” Or “silly me, why did I choose this sexual orientation?” Or so forth. Caulfield emphasized that the choice to stay unvaccinated is not the same as immutable characteristics such as physical appearance and other things that can’t be readily changed on a day-to-day basis. Again, not that you necessarily want to change such immutable characteristics.

And choices have consequences. For example, @CarlBoucherKnee, a Twitter account that describes itself as “Just a dumb jock who would prefer Alberta to be less terrible,” had the following “choice” tweet:

Yeah, try railing against businesses, schools, and other organizations for restricting your freedom to show all of your chest hair or your bare breasts. Of note, a sign at a business that says “No Shirts, No Shoes, No Service” doesn’t mean that you can walk into that business wearing a shirt and shoes but nothing else. Wait until you hear what pant-less and underwear-less people aren’t able to do.

Yeah, must-wear-shirts, must-wear-pants, and vaccination requirements are in place to protect other people. Other people should have the right and freedom to not get readily exposed to things that may readily endanger their health as the following tweet emphasized:

Trying to call the “unvaccinated” the “most discriminated against group” can come across as very offensive to people of color, many women, those with disabilities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and others who have continued to struggled against real discrimination and have had their lives massively altered as a result. By choosing to ignore or minimize their plight, isn’t one in effect further discriminating against them?