I reject societal contracts that do not support individual and body sovereignty. Of course, you can do with that as you will, because.. ..well.. ..sovereignty. Just know that if you take body sovereignty from people in one area, you empower the government to make decisions about your body, as well.

..and as we all have seen, the benevolence of the government is largely dependent on what party is in power, and what societal dynamics are in play. it's.. ..unreliable, at best.

I literally called it, the day Democrats started pushing forced vaccinations, that the Republicans would go for reversal of abortion law. ..and they fucking did, and they fucking succeeded in many ways, and that is direct consequence of permitting the government to violate body sovereignty, even when the voiced arguments do not pertain to it.

So, you can have your contiguous society, with forced social contracts rather than ones people actually are willing to agree to. ..and you'll also have the consequences, whether or not you can cognize how bad that will be right now.

Crackpot theories.. ..like.. ... how evolution works? ..or how regressive evolution works?

Diseases have killed countless people, and we have multiple vectors (and should have multiple vectors) for addressing them.

We have technology, as in vaccines. This is a good thing.

We have social behaviors including social pressure (which is, unfortunately, often compulsive and not well-aimed by the people that exercise it, but such is life).

We have individual immunity, and the direct biological pressure for health and general genetic robustness, which is also a good thing, even though it kills some of us.

the cool thing is, we're now at a point where there are lots of anti-vaxxers who are totally willing to throw their lives away for the benefit of the species. ..and, their surviving genetic lines and the rest of the species, as their children interbreed with the rest of humanity, will be better off for it. That's true, whether you like it or not. It's also true that forcing vaccination rather than simply providing and incentivizing vaccination is a terribly, terribly flawed strategy which causes far more issues than it fixes.

I understand that you're making social-pressure arguments, and that they are valid in the context you're in. But they aren't the end-all be-all, and they're not fundamentally scientific (or even logical) just because you're trying to support science by using them.

I also know this whole conversation brings up tons of uncomfortable topics, for which I'll probably get yelled at. I just don't care, because being more forceful about an argument, or getting the last word, really has no bearing on the truth of that word.