There is only one main thing I am actually trying to get across and it is that of empathy, solidarity, truth and ethics.
So let's imagine the following:
60% have the real pass, 35 % have the fake pass, 5% have none.
The MSM is reporting daily that 95% are vaxxed, and 5% are unvaxed. The vaxed are consuming the MSM daily.
Then the clamp-down against the unvaxed begins.
How high is the threshold for the 35% to out themselves and join the 5% in support against the 60% and the state?
How is love and empathy of the vaxed (towards the unvaxed) effected by them knowing
a) that they are 95% against 5%?
b) that they are 60% against 40%?
Is there a difference between a and b that might lead to a different reaction by the 60%?
Is it thus ethical to get a fake pass when you can assume that it might affect those who stand firm against it all?
Let's not even call it ethical, let's say: Is it brotherly?
Many of us will propably resort to getting a fake pass when the suffering surpasses our strenght, but is it ethical? No.
I absolutely and vehemently disagree! "At all costs" includes deadly sins and apostasy. No!
Thanks for your response,
Your hypothetical example is very appropiate and the questions it poses merit an answer I don't have at this moment. Just an observation: given our current circumstances the percentage of the jabless certified will be far closer to the 5% than to 35% at least in the West and even in many parts of Latin America.
The last part, well, right now one can almost say that receiving the jab is an act of apostasy given what we know about it and how a self declared heretic antipope like Bergoglio supports it.