Quote Originally Posted by Johnson85 View Post
We have not ignored him. We don't have pandemics because of moral failings. We have pandemics because sometimes there are novel contagious viruses. We listened and locked down for mostly no purpose after the first two weeks. In hindsight, even the first two weeks were pointless, but we didn't know as much about the virus then. We seriously damaged the finances of our hospitals and more or less accomplished nothing other than ensuring that our powder is not dry when we need it. And it wouldn't have taken any great effort for Dobbs to learn that there was going to be a limit to how much people would adjust their behavior in response to a pandemic. It would have basically required that he have a little bit of curiosity and ask somebody.

Also, it is somewhat fascinating to me that in school, when we learned about flagellants during the black death, it was sort of with the context of "can you believe how ignorant and crazy those people were"? But apparently there is a deep seated human need to believe we could have avoided bad things if we just acted more morally rather than accepting that there are bad things that happen that we can't avoid short of choosing something worse.
You are aware of the difference between mitigating and avoiding? Why does it have to be all or nothing. i don't get the "either it stops it cold or it's useless" point of view. I will never get that view in a million years. Like it or not there IS a moral component to this. We have a moral duty to our fellow man to do our best not to let our actions endanger other's lives. That is the basis of all peaceful civilization.