Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
I am talking about the lives of 60 million+ against those of your 3.7 million. You cannot justify curtailing the freedoms of that number of people for what is an indefinite period to protect 3.7 million from contracting the virus. Don't forget that even out of those 3.7 million, only a small proportion will become seriously ill and die.
We must do what we can to protect them, of course, by shielding, but not by imposing suffocating rules on everyone else. That would be control freakery at its worst.
|
But you’re not curtailing the freedoms of 60 million people, it would be restricting those that deliberately choose not to have the vaccine which in nowhere near that number.
Your proposed actions restrict the lives of those that have no choice if they can have the vaccine due to medical reasons or to those who are offered less protection by it