[blacksmith_tb]

Your friend does sound insufferable, yes. But I don't think it's quite fair to Mr. Singer, whatever you think of his arguments, to say he merely 'fancies himself' a moral philosopher - it is his day job... [1]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer

[mandmandam]

He ought to get better at it then.

He makes no mention of the riots that would ensue, the extreme data privacy issues, the medical ethics involved in sticking people without their consent, or the fact that these governments and companies have abysmal track records with involuntary medical experimentation.

[elefanten]

1. Riots are manageable. Rollout strategy would have a lot of impact on the severity of backlash.

2. Data privacy issues marginal, not particularly unique. It’s an extant, broader problem that should be addressed but isn’t a reason to refrain from vaccination.

3. Laws and regulations don’t require individual consent. Again it’s marginal: the state already requires / bans various behaviors related to the bodies / health of individual citizens.

4. Involuntary experimentation is a minuscule / out-dated problem in the present. And it’s a non sequitur from vaccinating the population.

[mandmandam]

1. Well that's not ominous at all. Glad that resistance is "manageable".

2. Data privacy experts disagree, as does the WHO special envoy on COVID.

3. Medical ethics do, in fact, demand individual consent. As do human rights.

4. Ha. https://www.somo.nl/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/Examples-of-u... , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unethical_human_experimentatio... , Guantanamo etc.

... And when you have everyone vaccinated, then what? Are you going to vaccinate Africa, for free? Are you going to vaccinate the deer, and all our pets too? The mice??? And give them all boosters? What's the end game here?