Still a choice?

Dear Editor:

RE: The editor’s note on a letter last week (Doesn’t like notes, Nov. 11).

I would like to present a few dictionary definitions.

From the Oxford Languages:

– force: (v)(2) make (someone) do something against their will. “She was forced into early retirement;”

– compel (v)(1) to force or oblige (someone) to do something;

– coercion: the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.

Second, from the Merriam Webster Dictionary:

– force:(n)(3) violence, compulsion or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing. “Those who do not respond to kindness must yield to force;”

– force:(v)(2) to compel by physical, moral or intellectual means;

– compel: (trans. v.) (1) to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly. “the general was compelled to surrender.” (2) to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure;

– coercion:(n) the act, process or power of coercing. “they used coercion to obtain the confession;”

– coerce (trans. v.)(1) to compel to an act or choice. “was coerced into agreeing.”

In light of these dictionary definitions I would respectfully disagree with the editor’s note beneath “Doesn’t like notes” (Nov. 11) that states, “No one is being forced to take the vaccine against their will. It remains a personal choice that may have consequences.”

When your choice is “get vaccinated or lose your job,” if you lose your job you don’t get EI (which you have paid into) because you lost your job as a result of not being vaccinated, can we as a society, still claim that we are truly giving people a choice?

Cathy deWitt,
Arthur