[ragona]

This is clearly a spectrum. On one hand we have Mad Max-style "might is right" anarchy, which is over-prioritizing freedom. On the other we remove all personal choice in order to "keep people safe."

So the question is, "how much risk is acceptable?" Are we okay with the idea that getting sick can ruin your entire financial future? Are we okay with child labor? Personally I lean towards providing a social safety net, and I think most people actually want _some_ version of that as well -- but perhaps have not thought deeply about where exactly the balance is for them.

[SAI_Peregrinus]

There's also a question of how personal freedom interacts between people. If one person has a contagious disease, and knows it, do they have a right to put others at risk of infection without those others' consent? If so, that infringes on the personal freedom of the others. If not, then isn't their personal freedom infringed? "Prioritizing freedom" and "keeping people safe" can each claim either position!