You know, I can say the same thing about the government COVID vaccine lotteries by your logic:
So the governments wins out in the end; yes they pay out a handful of winning citizens, but wins in that the all the "losers" now have no excuse but to get back to work and make up that lost tax dollars they just expended on a PR move that frankly, strikes me as insulting in the highest order.
Yes, you understand correctly. The problem with that being? It's a manipulative tactic no matter who does it.
Also, if your contention is that governments are doing it, therefore it must be okay; I'd like to direct your attention to the Tuskeegee Syphilis experiments, MKUltra, or any of the other sketchy things the United States (or your local government) have been caught out doing.
The majority doing something immoral does not make it okay. Pragmatists be damned. There are things that should not be done. If you want your people to take vaccines, you bend over backwards to ensure you bust open everything hidden that could be reasonably construed as putting one over on people.
You also need to be willing to accept that some won't play ball. Period. Then move on. Not even public health gets a pass for degenerating into full on authoritarianism. Not if Liberty means anything.
And no, I'm fully behind vaccination. Voluntary vaccination. As on people agreeing it is in their best interest free from external coercive forces, be they political or economic. Otherwise it's just thuggery by people wearing nice suits.
Oddly enough, what you're proposing sounds more like 'thuggery' to me then the lotteries? From here, what it sounds like you're saying is "people need to be protected from their baser instincts because they're not capable of making the decision themselves" ?
The lotteries ARE voluntary vaccination. Just like lotteries in general are voluntary. People choose to play. It sounds like you want to remove that choice from them 'for their own good' and because it meets your definition of 'immoral'. That sounds very authoritarian to me ?
Comments
You know, I can say the same thing about the government COVID vaccine lotteries by your logic:
So the governments wins out in the end; yes they pay out a handful of winning citizens, but wins in that the all the "losers" now have no excuse but to get back to work and make up that lost tax dollars they just expended on a PR move that frankly, strikes me as insulting in the highest order.
Yes, you understand correctly. The problem with that being? It's a manipulative tactic no matter who does it.
Also, if your contention is that governments are doing it, therefore it must be okay; I'd like to direct your attention to the Tuskeegee Syphilis experiments, MKUltra, or any of the other sketchy things the United States (or your local government) have been caught out doing.
The majority doing something immoral does not make it okay. Pragmatists be damned. There are things that should not be done. If you want your people to take vaccines, you bend over backwards to ensure you bust open everything hidden that could be reasonably construed as putting one over on people.
You also need to be willing to accept that some won't play ball. Period. Then move on. Not even public health gets a pass for degenerating into full on authoritarianism. Not if Liberty means anything.
And no, I'm fully behind vaccination. Voluntary vaccination. As on people agreeing it is in their best interest free from external coercive forces, be they political or economic. Otherwise it's just thuggery by people wearing nice suits.
Oddly enough, what you're proposing sounds more like 'thuggery' to me then the lotteries? From here, what it sounds like you're saying is "people need to be protected from their baser instincts because they're not capable of making the decision themselves" ?
The lotteries ARE voluntary vaccination. Just like lotteries in general are voluntary. People choose to play. It sounds like you want to remove that choice from them 'for their own good' and because it meets your definition of 'immoral'. That sounds very authoritarian to me ?