of course I respect your viewpoint. however, to be logically consistent... do you pay for the treatment of a diabetic who continues to eat sweets, or a lung cancer patient who continues to smoke, or a gay person who, during the AIDS epidemic, kept going to bathhouses for unprotected sex?

What about people who go hiking in dangerous areas and then need to be airlifted out? Should they pay for emergency chopper services? What about people who build homes in places where forest fires are a real danger? Should the government pay them for rebuilding costs?

do you want to punish one group but give others a pass? Just curious.

If you would like to equally penalize all people who make risky choices then that is a logically consistent position. If you pick and choose, that is not.

Note - there is one really big caveat. Since COVID is contagious, it is important to emphasize that people who have it need to self-quarantine. I'm also fine with people and companies choosing to exercise rules such as - I won't socialize with anyone who is not vaccinated or all employees must wear a mask.

My issue is with the government forcing people to get a medical treatment they don't want. I totally support whatever choices people make for their own health.