So preservation of life should or shouldn't be based on age? What if this virus was killing 0-5 year old children, would the view be the same?
What if it impacted the 20-25 year old bracket?
In every single aspect of life, things which befall younger people is seen as more tragic than that which befalls the elderly. That’s how it always has been. It’s not controversial to say this. People should be protected as much as possible; in particular those who need it most. But at the expense of everyone else? I have a responsibility to my fellow humans but they also have a responsibility to protect themselves.
And here’s my point- protect ourselves and each other to the best of our ability without (and I stress obviously in my opinion) negatively effecting the lives of the majority or ourselves in too great a way. That just makes no sense to me. I should support lockdowns even if it means I lose my income, can’t afford to pay my bills? Feel suicidal? Honestly that just makes no sense to me.
I know I’m in a losing position as in the immediate present, lockdown will save lives. It’s akin to banning all cars tomorrow- road traffic accidents will drop dramatically. But long term, is it the right thing? Well I don’t think so and don’t expect you or anyone else to be able to answer that. But I’ll say this, when this vaccine arrives it needs to be mandatory for the “vulnerable” population otherwise this really is all for nothing.