> Da fuq?

> People were being called plague rats, scum, degenerates, etc. At societal, national, international, levels, unvaccinated people were 'other'ed to an extremely disturbing degree - fired from work, separated from loved ones, locked indoors, bashed on national media at all levels.

> People were talking, and still talk of denying them medical treatment, ending the Geneva convention, altering the Declaration of Human Rights, etc, to force people into taking "perfectly safe and 100% effective" vaccines. Which weren't that at all.

> Anyone who spoke out for them was the target of immediate white-hot anger. Don't know where you live to have missed all this, but claiming there wasn't broad levels of hate is just gaslighting, and I don't like it.

Right, that sounds like what I said earlier, mandmandam:

"There was anger, sure, but not hate" - and you affirmed it; white-hot anger. And it was deserved. But broad hate, no. We just wanted people to be responsible.

When you violate the social contract (protecting others by doing what's due), you attract anger.

I'm not really here to debate it; anyone saying otherwise is spinning our anger for others' irresponsibility and others' putting the immunocompromised in danger.