[jasonvorhe]

The constitution works both ways: The state has to ensure personal liberty to everyone but what if a group started to restrict another group's liberties? Which group do you provide liberty for? It's a dilemma: Either those who sacrificed 2 years of their liberty so that scientists could come up with a vaccine, restoring all previous liberties after herd immunity would've been reached, all without causing the deaths millions of vulnerable people. Or those who decide against a vaccine where there is scientific consensus on effectiveness, who cause the infection to spread further and further, without having a scientific/rational reason for the decision, because it's rooted in fear.