curl-6 said:
EricHiggin said:
A leader can't make it extremely clear that every last life matters, then turn a blind eye to the indirect non illness related death's that happen because of the choice to lockdown. What they're doing at that point is considerably influencing who lives and dies. If those who die belong to another with no connection, it's seen as not so bad. If it impacts individuals directly, all the sudden it's a major problem. It's not just the politicians who are hypocrites.
The 'greater good', can mean many things to different people, all justified to them and their groups, which at times can go against the majority. This is why people need to be free to choose, within reason. The more of that freedom you take away, the more problems you will cause down the road. A community requires most to be on the same page. When it's split, it's no longer a community.
|
People can't always be free to choose because then you end up with many people dying as the result of the selfish actions of a few who refuse to behave responsibly. Absolute individualism is impractical, you can't have rights without responsibilities. Sometimes, to save as many lives as possible, the individual has to accept inconveniences such as wearing a mask.
|
As I said prior, free to choose, within reason.
Most people will make the more logical choice if it's properly presented to them by trustworthy sources. If you can't convince those people, it's just as much your problem as theirs. Forcing them to comply is not the right answer. It will eventually lead to the opposite of what you're trying to achieve.
Essay Pro