Oh Ken, perhaps the govt will pay you to run an ad campaign with emotive slogans like that?!
What you and some others clearly fail to recognise is that there is a fine line between medical interventions being directly forced and indirectly forced.
Medical interventions are universally accepted as requiring free and informed consent. Without undue influence.
IMO it is absolutely reasonable to argue that threatening one's livelihood by demanding an intervention for them to continue working, is indirectly forcing an intervention. It should come as no surprise to you that many people simply cannot afford to give up their jobs and support themselves for however long it may take for them to find alternative employment.
This notion that "you still have a choice", is not by any means as simple as it sounds when it involves the ability of people to be able to put food on the table. It may not be directly forcing, but it will often involve no real "free" choice due to the extreme detriment of the alternative. It's certainly coercion and could be argued that it's a form of extortion, imo.
At the moment, it seems to me that the state premiers are simply supporting and pushing whatever threats they can in their political race to "winning". They are competing with each other over random "milestones" in an effort to appear superior to the others. It is politics, not health.
Gladys is scared of a certain group of people, regardless of whether she has any actual reason to suspect that any one of those who she may mingle with has ANY sickness or poses ANY threat to her health whatsoever. She apparently uses general and flaky "statistics" to determine who she interacts with. Wow, let that sink in. That's like saying "people from XYZ commit more violent crimes than those from my country so I will not allow anyone from XYZ near me, and I urge you all to do the same; frown upon them as a danger and a threat". Massive generalisations with ZERO regard for actual or individual risk. I think there's a name for that. Next she'll be saying that minority group XYZ has a higher risk of infection or transmission due to their genetics/age/BMI/VitD/whatever than others, so should be banished from society. Go figure. Clown world.
Btw I don't expect you to appreciate these concepts, after your recent abysmal display of comprehension around cases vs infections.
Automatically assuming that an individual is an immediate threat to your health simply because they have not chosen a particular medical intervention is nonsense. Whatever happened to recognising risk based on the ACTUAL threat that person poses?
The silver bullet certainly isn't working for Israel when it comes to stopping transmission, so on what basis is Gladys scared? AFAICT her sniffly jabbed friends are more likely to pass something to her than a healthy unjabbed person is...? But we all know that's not the point of her comment is it? It's about "winning the race" against Dan and co. SMH.
In the meantime, people suffer as their business are forced shut, travel restricted, etc etc etc
Clown world.
Oh, and Ken, perhaps you can help out with that video I'm looking for..? Just ONE!?
