>>10379313 (PB)

If all men are created equal, then one man has as much right to refuse health care as his neighbor has to accept it.

Noted human rights activist, industrialist, farmer, and inventor Samuel Colt (1814-1862) would beg to disagree with the dear (and mere) professor.

If the vaccine works, then those who take it are protected from any risk a non-vaccinated person might pose and thus, lacking a foundation in collective safety, the state has no legal basis for requiring it. If the vaccines do not work, the state has no foundation for requiring it under any pretext. In the unlikely event that a SAFE and effective vaccine is formulated, a non-vaccinated person poses a risk only to another non-vaccinated person and each has voluntarily assumed the risks associated with their refusal. They do not pose a risk to the population at large and THAT risk is the only basis by which the state acquires the power to impose the collective will upon the individual right.

Tell that law professor that we settled the issue of collective mandate v. personal right in the early 1700s and it only took about 3% of the general population to achieve that resolution of the question as to which principle would dominate our culture. It was in all the papers of the day so he, being such a smart man, can look it up at his leisure.