I can report similar things. A very good friend of my husband has taken the jab but I never thought of him being a mindless believer in this or that, he decided on his own and I can accept that right away. He makes no fuzz about his decision, does not want to convince anyone else and wouldn't even have spoken about it if not having been asked by me. I have no harsh feelings about him, nothing that provokes me, I feel he is a person I can respect despite what he is doing different from what I do and decide. Now, isn't this something everyone wishes to experience? Having different opinions and being able nevertheless to co-exist peacefully?
I feel, where it happens differently, people either want to lure me, convince me, talk me into doing what they do, I strongly feel repulsed. When those persons start to talk about explicit morals, it's hard to not fall into this foot trap and answering them in explicit moral terms. For all this morals which are ordered, written down, expressed in regulations and such, make it impossible to act upon an implicit ethic on my own. For it is declared criminal or punishable.
Morality or ethics happens situational and for only those who are involved at that time being. For example, imagine you were a manager of an olds people care home and one of those elderlies were about to die and his relatives and family members would have needed and wanted to give their last company. I, if I would have been the manager of this place, would have liked to given them access. I would have thought about the question how to make it possible that this could take place. I bet, this happened all over the world but rarely can be talked about or is hold secretly.
Managers who did not want to carry this responsibility gave it up very easily (or never really acted upon it). They could claim that they were following the rules and regulations, that they were acting in accordance with the officially issued moral maxims and were thus on the side of the law in no time at all. But in doing so, they circumvented the questioning of their own conscience, because where there is no weighing up between the prevailing law and the prevailing personal conscience, this implicit ethics cannot unfold.
Some welcome the freedom of choice in precisely such difficult situations, for others it is an unbearable burden.
Making things an official rule does in no way solve the problems of the individual. He has to have the freedom of choice, for which he then is responsible.
Putting on a long comment like this is very good and I won't lie to you mate I was amazed when I saw this at first,but reading through real put me at ease a little bit and I want to say nice contribution irrespective of how long or big it is really,a very nice story line and you have done well enough to add value with your contribution to the content,hope to see something as long as this often,you really tried mate and let me cherish your level of contsitency too mate
So you are saying what you really mean then?