Originally Posted by
WMUG
I believe we're here because of an accident of chemistry and physics, and we've evolved behaviours that are beneficial to our individual survival.
From that point of view, morality, rights and all that good stuff is essentially arbitrary, rather than inherent. I have values that were instilled in me by my upbringing and my own musings, but I don't operate under the assumption that my values are The Best or objectively correct.
So I don't believe inalienable rights really exist in any measurable way. Certain groups of people can agree to protect the right to do this or that, but people are inevitably going to disagree about what should and shouldn't be protected.
The way I see it, groups of people are going to grant themselves authority because that's their natural instinct, and there isn't anything which can't have exceptions. You might wish that a certain group didn't have power, in which case you can either challenge their authority or attempt to escape it, but them having authority isn't inherently good or bad because inherent good and bad don't exist.
I basically think the less humans die unnecessarily, the better. I imagine most would agree on that. I also think that people should be able to do pretty much whatever they want, provided that doesn't stop others doing what they want. I know. Groundbreaking stuff.
These two values come into conflict when it comes to mandatory vaccinations (let's forget Covid for a moment and assume the disease that's being vaccinated against is actually society-endangering). If the whole population (or as close to it as possible) doesn't get vaccinated, people will die unnecessarily. But if you force them to get vaccinated, that robs people of being able to do what they like, and might also cause people to die unnecessarily via unintended consequences.
I don't know how you reconcile those two values, and I'm suspicious of anyone who says that one should be prioritised over the other because *obviously* it should, without giving a good reason.