• GoodEye8@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If you want to get philosophical, society always has to turm authoritarian when it needs to deal with people who reject society. You either forcefully reject the ones who refuse to partake or you let them warp society in their image.

    Being anti-vax is the same as being against society. Now, completely trying to get rid of them, like nazis tried with jews, is a bit extreme but penalizing antivaxxers IMO is perfectly fine. You can’t simply endanger others just because you refuse to partake in society.

    • OccamsRazer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      When it comes to laws, I agree that the whole point of laws is to benefit society and that people who don’t want to follow the laws are subject to an authoritarian response. In the case of covid vaccines, the law stopped short of requiring them by law. It nearly did so through executive mandates, but not quite. But even if it were so, dehumanizing language like “plague rat”, and it being a step towards a dark societal path, is not the same as consequences for breaking the law in the context of what a healthy society looks like. ANY dehumanizing language is bad and dangerous and there are no exceptions.