Canada just lost its measles-free status. So here’s the question…
If an unvaccinated child spreads measles to someone else’s kid, why shouldn’t the parents be liable in small-claims court?
I’m not talking about criminal charges, just basic responsibility. If your choice creates the risk you should have to prove you weren’t the reason someone else’s child got sick.
Is that unreasonable?
We’re you not just arguing against having laws to disallow stabbing? If not, then I’m not clear on what you mean by “controlling others”.
Couldn’t this also apply to abuse of power? Accepting that there’s the possibility of bad outcomes, and that’s the cost of certain benefits, like protecting everyone from some easily preventable causes of death. It sounds like maybe what you’re arguing for isn’t that exerting control over others in and way is universally bad, but rather that bodily autonomy needs to be protected above all. But if that’s the case, I don’t understand why you think it’s only acceptable to protect it by not actively doing something that violates bodily autonomy, and why it’s not okay to actively protect bodily autonomy (e.g. preventing others from inserting undesirable sharp objects into your body, whether that be a knife or an injection or anything else).
I agree that centralization is power is problematic, but this is a whole other problem independent of bodily autonomy. Unless you’re saying that controlling others is only bad when it’s done by a central power? But you’re also making arguments against mandatory vaccination in general, so I’m still unclear on what your stance is.