We’re on the same page. That SCOTUS didn’t toss the mandates period was more than disappointing (though not a surprise). And you’re right, our bodily autonomy beats any arguments at all about “does it work to protect others?”.

I failed to make your correct & substantive point. It’s also in international human rights agreements between >190 countries. They’re OUR human rights. They don’t belong to governments to choose to waive or not.

I don’t waver from this, while also telling those who don’t buy what we’re saying about article 6, human rights & bodily autonomy, that the darn things do not do any of the things they appear to think they do.

I think the answer to the question, “if the vaccines did markedly reduce transmission, should the state have the right to waive your right of bodily autonomy?” is NO.

The idea that it would be selfish not to get vaccinated under the scenario immediately above is silly.

I’m a thoughtful person & I’d take reasonable steps to minimise risk of harming others. I do that in other aspects of life. The best way to do that is to keep away from others if I’m symptomatic. And I do. So stick your “vaccine mandates”. Govt simply doesn’t hold the waiver of my / our inalienable human rights. And no, it’s not selfish to insist on deciding each for ourselves.

Thanks for the prompt! Mike ❤️🙏🤗