Is it logical to say you support choice, but only until 6% make that choice, then you‘ll ban it?
An example....
Do we say “Meh, let it go until we count 51 adults pushing”? Or have a GLOBAL rule that ALL adults have a duty to let kids go first?
Better to think of it as “We all have a duty to vaccinate unless medically unable”.
I’m disappointed when MLAs cite “freedom” without balancing it with “public good”. It’s how the Charter works. Yelling “rights” w/o citizenship is a toddler’s view of freedom.
-let my 10 year old drive
- drive w/o a car seat for my 2 year old
- let my 15 year old drink & drive
- punish my child by withholding food and water
Even if I disagree with the accepted science on those things.
Haven’t seen the MLAs crying “freedom” share how they balance that with the public duty.
Abstentions suggest a party that still placates its fringes.
We see this w/gun control in the US. 90% want background checks to buy guns. But the 10% who don’t will vote on ONLY that issue. The 90% really don’t engage. So a small angry group gets a veto.
Or, prove them right and move on.
That’s it. Rant over.