A number of people opposed to the new flu shot are complaining about the language being used to characterize their position. In particular, they reject the word "refuse." Of course they are right, but, if they would only consider what they are up against, they might have second thoughts. Suppose this were a real plague--Bubonic, for example, with a death rate in affected cities of 50%. Those who refused the vaccine would be endangering the lives of others.
When the death rate is closer to that of influenza (please don't argue the numbers, because you would be simply falling into a trap they have set for you), the parallel breaks down immediately, but the powers-that- be, with the support of perhaps 200 million sheep, have made the parallel a question of national unity. In such a case, they naturally, sincerely, and without duplicity regard anti-vaccers as something between traitors and serial killers. Too bad they are opposed to capital punishment, because Refusniks would be at the head of their list.
There is no reason to get upset, because this is the way things are, and most people accept the version of reality they receive on the news.
It is good to remember the argument given by the wicked stepmother in that literary and ethical masterpiece, "Hansel and Gretel." When her husband, whose first attempt to kill the children failed, is reluctant to try it again, she tells him, "He who says A, must say B." If I recall correctly, it was a favorite saying of Lenin, and will always be used by every enemy of all that is good and true. If you really think wearing a mask or keeping social distancing saved a large number of lives, they you have signed onto the proposition that those who refuse should be forced to get the jab and probably punished severely. Surely, there are camps along our Southern border, once we have let all the illegals out to prey upon Americans, where the Refusniks could be housed, herded, and brainwashed.
Be Seeing You.