The seatbelt analogy is false. Conscription is a little closer, but still false.
An accurate analogy would be if a government showed up with a 1 million-round revolver, loaded with 8 bullets. A form of Russian roulette, mandated. Put it to your head, and pull the trigger. Now your spouse, now your kids, now the government moves on to the next house. Your odds (or those of your loved ones) of dying is only 8 in a million. If for whatever hypothetical reason this would save exponentially more lives, would it be ethical? That is the gist of the dilemma.
But bear in mind the purpose of these vaccine mandates: to "win the war on COVID" and other buzz-phrase formulations. It ignores that the virus has mutated, and likely will continue to. It ignores that the vaccine doesn't prevent contraction or transmission. It doesn't prevent death (in those 999,992 times it doesn't kill). It only improves odds.
Just like "lockdowns" (except for all the reasons you don't have to follow them...), the contradictions are obvious. People see the contradictions, which is why you see protests across the globe over "mandates". That's also why lockdowns are relevant to this thread. It is one more use of power people find illegitimate. It is something some people find an overstepping of authority. Perhaps they really find it all unethical
They have a point.
Bookmarks