Dear Dan,

Nathan was speaking of "civil liberties", so I explained to him that liberties (or freedoms) are not a civil thing. Now when you mention "state rights" and "personal rights", you are speaking of something altogether different. My response to SteeleRedux, below, should explain that:

Dear SteeleRedux,

«Surely sacrificed some and gained others would be more apt.»

If you freely elect to belong to a civilisation, then you sacrifice your freedom and in return receive other benefits, which could perhaps also include some rights.

But rights are not freedoms: freedoms are a-priori, God-given, natural, whereas rights are man-made and far more limited, thus any rational person who chooses to exchange freedoms for rights, must be doing so for the other benefits rather than for the rights.

You can view it this way: You have a $100 note, you purchase certain benefits (such as protection, healthcare, roads, etc.) for $99.25, and receive a 75c change of coins, representing your civil rights.

Yuyutsu,
Nice calculation but you forgot responsibility which is in the 75 Cents !

I echo the comments of Yuyutsu, I suppose the term civil liberties resonates with some people and that's why I used the term.

Freedom regardless is very important and I find it a shock, that one person, labelled as a Prime Minister can have a large impact on one's freedom to move, walk, gather and socialise.

http://indaily.com.au/news/2020/03/18/govt-limits-indoor-meetings-to-100-bans-overseas-travel/?fbclid=IwAR0QPznShpF2fbFDFpK5F1nhCQwn07x2Wmq7FThZLU6ppMWgBSg1WezHalQ

This article relating to flu deaths last year highlighted 298 people dying highlighting:

Source: Department of Health (federal)

LATEST AVAILABLE STATE-BY-STATE DATA**

SA - 19,964 cases, 82 deaths
NSW - about 43,000 cases, 70 deaths
VIC - 25,969 cases, 50 deaths
WA - 17,640 cases, 48 deaths
QLD - 23,947 cases, 38 deaths
ACT - 1595 cases, fewer than 5 deaths
NT - 1079 cases, 4 deaths
TAS - 1390 cases, 1 death

http://7news.com.au/news/health/flu-deaths-hit-300-as-season-passes-peak-c-209939

With that also in mind it must be realised that limiting movement or numbers of people who gather simply does not work. This recent decision is a political one, aiming to improve the image of the Government, but at the expense of freedom which is built within us all and should never be touched - including mine!

Hey NathanJ,

It doesn't matter what you think about COVID-19
There's no denting the crisis is helping to set dangerous precedents / promote global agendas.

Mandatory Vaccinations
Total Lockdown or Limited / Controlled Movement
Health Checks and Check Points
Cashless Society

- And you're all willing to sign off on it because it's in our nature to adapt to unforeseen and difficult situations in the interest of the greater good.

You would NEVER have agreed to this under any other circumstance, but NOW YOU CHAMPION IT.

These new government provisions will become order of the day.

What did someone earlier today tell me Millenials are calling COVID-19 now?
'Boomer Remover'.
Some people think this whole thing is to kill off old people that Millenials, Communists and Economists seem to think the world can't afford, or would be better off without.
Push it all through with a whole new authoritarian set of rules for coming generations.

What do I think?
I think it's ironic that the very people who've been complacent and aloof regarding the whole thing, those who've failed to prepare and think life will continue the same and that their lives will not in any way be affected;
- Are the very same people whinging and carrying on in disbelief that people are stripping the shopping centre shelves.

I think these people are delusional, cognitive dissonance maybe.
They assume they won't be affected and that everyone else should think like them.
But these are also the same people who won't self isolate, and think everyone else is overdoing it to stop the spread of the outbreak.

You don't have to worry as much if you're somewhat prepared.
Just pack up the pandemic pantry and the camping and fishing equipment and go bush.

Do you stay at home close to cities and anticipate an increased chance of getting it?
(Then the door to door mandatory vaccinations)
Or head out to the sticks and reduce the chance of getting it in the first place?

[Cont.]

What are you REALLY worried about anyway NathanJ
You going to miss out on a few weeks of Church and bible study?
- Though I'm not knocking your right to want to go under normal circumstances;
But I think some of you are so determined to follow your religious routines you'd risk harming yourselves and others.

If so, you'd be wrong to do so.
'Everybody has the right to live however they choose so long as it doesn't affect others in a negative and detrimental manner.'

I bet you'd still be willing to drag the kids along to Church or send them to youth group, and be disappointed and disapproving (peer pressure) when the older-aged church members are absent, right?

This post is the sort of garbage that the Prime Minister referred to as un-Australian and uniformed fear mongering of the sort expected from nutters on Twitter.