"What is happening now" has never happened before in our , lifetime, and comparing the coercion, which is not working all that well, with mundane, everyday rules and regulations is nonsense.

I'll stick with Sonia, thankyou.

As far as I am concerned the bottom line is that my life is worth much more than your personal freedom to disrupt other`s lives.

Baume’s response above is entirely pragmatic.

But from any philosophical argument on the subject of health, inclusive of the heading public health, then the health of the citizen is tied directly to justice.

This is the point all argument wanders off across the broad acres of a large paddock.

I’ve noticed the main objections to the powers of health officials and Government control of the movement of its citizens, is predominantly couched in terms of the controls over human rights of the individual.

But to the health officials, the argument to what direction will the allocation of resources take, is a moral one.
Is their focus to be on prevention of disease, or the treatment of disease. Prevention is winning ATM, but that stand could change.

The “real cost” in economic terms, is laying heavily on officials at the top level in decision making.
The balancing of justice can tip in many unseen ways.
The destruction of business as a consequence to locking people away from each other, (the antithesis of most modern business models), is a point in question.

Balancing the human right of a citizen to a standard length of life based on averages, is the goal now attempted.

My guess is, sooner or later they will need to change this stand.

It can be well argued, the destruction of a society in order to save it, speaks for itself; but who pays the highest cost in the end, is the argument of justice.

Dan

Absolutely agree! Those that don't should feel free to join Sonia somewhere else, anywhere else that'll have them! Where they'd remain free to roam and share any infection, polio, smallpox, whooping cough, blackwater fever, yellow fever, typhoid and tetanus inside, closed from the rest of the world, borders!

And in the ordinary course of events cease to become a problem caused by extreme ignorance coupled to extreme selfishness, for the rest of cooperating humanity! And far better than they and their ultra, juvenile delinquent/infant terrible, attitudes deserve!
Alan B.

To what end? The difference with smallpox and polio is that those vaccines are sterilising. These ones are not, and there has never been a sterilising coronavirus vaccine, and likely never will be. We're stuck with the common cold for this reason, and we will be stuck with WuFlu as well. The only reason this is a pandemic is that our immune systems are naive to this virus, but that's already on the decline. It will eventually settle down and become a background disease in the way many other respiratory viruses are. The only question is about how long that takes.

Lockdowns don't stop this process, they just kick the can down the road. Potentially, a higher vaccination rate could mitigate some deaths, but, like with the common cold, that doesn't prevent you getting it again in the future, or having some colds worse than others. So, the real question is how far down the road should we kick the can for something we're going to have to live with anyway?

In think that you are probably right, Silver.

Regarding COVID prevention measures, the author is mostly correct, but then he produces examples that go way beyond the need to prevent injury to third parties.

Yes, it is acceptable (though not honourable) to coerce others in self-defense, but never beyond that: coercion must be limited only to that which is truly essential for preventing the coerced from causing harm to others.

Coercion may never be used in order to:
1) "protect" those who do not wish to be protected, or against things they do not wish to be protected from.
2) generate comforts and benefits.
3) try to gain appreciation, status, name or fame.

The examples of seat-belts, iodide in flour and fluorine in water go well over and beyond what is reasonably moral.

"Baume was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in January 1992 in recognition of service to the Australian Parliament"

Well knowing who the authors' patrons are, who he serves, explains it all, the author being a politician, neither a philosopher nor one who cares for morality.

1, Do you believe what a left wing health care worker tells you?

2, Do you believe ANYTHING told to you, by a leftist who got their qualifications by being indoctrinated at a Marxist Monoversity?

3, i will willingly NEVER leave my home if the government will deliver "meals on wheels", a static exercise bike so i can get exercise while commenting on OLO, a rowing machine for the same reasons & a weight set too.

Lean into it people, embrace the crazy.