ARe you going to continue to use that citation to support your argument?
Yes. Contrary to your assertion, it was not "roundly panned". Lockdowns were a disastrous policy decision that did little to nothing to slow the virus spread and resulted in immense collateral damage. This was known and knowable prior to the pandemic. EVERY established pandemic preparedness plan advised AGAINST such draconian measures. We are now living through the results of these foolish decisions.
3) Poverty had a greater correlation to poor results and more pronounced learning missed/loss. I mean the impoverished were in ALL ways hit hardest with the shut downs.
Agreed. And again, this was quite knowable. Consider this pandemic preparedness report published by the ACLU in January 2008. It's almost prophetic in nature. You'll note that they use the terms "discriminatory" and "forcible" when speaking of vaccination and quarantine measures.
American history contains vivid reminders that grafting the values of law enforcement and national security onto public health is both ineffective and dangerous. Too often, fears aroused by disease and epidemics have justified abuses of state power. Highly discriminatory and forcible vaccination and quarantine measures adopted in response to outbreaks of the plague and smallpox over the past century have consistently accelerated rather than slowed the spread of disease, while fomenting public distrust and, in some cases, riots.
The lessons from history should be kept in mind whenever we are told by government officials that “tough,” liberty-limiting actions are needed to protect us from dangerous diseases. Specifically:
- Coercion and brute force are rarely necessary. In fact they are generally counterproductive—they gratuitously breed public distrust and encourage the people who are most in need of care to evade public health authorities.
- On the other hand, effective, preventive strategies that rely on voluntary participation do work. Simply put, people do not want to contract smallpox, influenza or other dangerous diseases. They want positive government help in avoiding and treating disease. As long as public officials are working to help people rather than to punish them, people are likely to engage willingly in any and all efforts to keep their families and communities healthy.
- Minorities and other socially disadvantaged populations tend to bear the brunt of tough public health measures.
https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/privacy/pemic_report.pdf
And if you go in without a mask, they can refuse to offer you service as well.
Sure they can. And then I refuse to patronize their business and go somewhere else where logic prevails.
I fail to see what makes my analogy so weak. I assume you think the effects are not comparable and therefore the analogy falls apart.
Being refused a Big Mac and being refused gainful employment in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness are hardly the same thing.
What do you mean when you say "othering"? I mean it sounds pretty gentle. It is like, someone said something mean about you?
I'm shocked that you (seemingly) support "othering" of unvaccinated people (although you prefer to soften that support by calling it "consequences"), yet don't know what it means.
Othering is a phenomenon in which some individuals or groups are defined and labeled as not fitting in within the norms of a social group. It is an effect that influences how people perceive and treat those who are viewed as being part of the in-group versus those who are seen as being part of the out-group.
Othering also involves attributing negative characteristics to people or groups that differentiate them from the perceived normative social group.
It is an “us vs. them” way of thinking about human connections and relationships. This process essentially involves looking at others and saying "they are not like me" or "they are not one of us."
Othering is a way of negating another person's individual humanity and, consequently, those that are have been othered are seen as less worthy of dignity and respect.
What Is Othering?
But whoa, YELL it from the mountain and claim victimhood if they ignore mainstream medical advice and there is a CONSEQUENCE from it.
I don't think that "mainstream medical advice" means what you think it means.
For example, the US CDC recommends that all people >5 SHOULD get a bivalent booster, while other countries won't even offer a booster to anyone under the age of 65. Which of those is the "mainstream medical advice" you are referring to?
Informed consent is a critical part of taking ANY medical advice, and when the government intrudes and declares that you can't participate in society unless you comply with their demands, informed consent is no longer possible.
