Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
My point was that they both were not against the law at one point and so only required only people to use their "common sense".
|
But they are not comparable, so there was no point made
---------- Post added at 19:12 ---------- Previous post was at 19:11 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
So, are you saying that Covid no longer represents a serious risk to the vulnerable e.g. immunocompromised, etc. ? If not, then surely mandating that an infectious person remain isolated is the only sensible & moral choice to make.
|
No it isn’t.
---------- Post added at 19:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:12 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99
You have not addressed the central point: if Covid still represents a serious danger to the vulnerable, surely there should be degree of mitigation, enforced in law, in the same way, that people are protected from drunk drivers.
|
Nope, it’s a pretty warped world between your ears!