The Student Room Group

Are Big Freshers Events Ethical?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by L'anatra.M
Exactly. If you don't want to lose your freedom just stand 2 m apart from people, wear a mask, don't be dumb and go to an overcrowded pub or restaurant. The point is that those freedoms were taken away because people didn't care about getting sick. Everyone always talks about inclusion and people shouldn't be treated differently but that's exactly what you're suggesting. Why should a kid miss out on their education because they're mother is at risk when all of they're friends get to go to school? Why should your children go hungry because you have diabetes when all your co workers can work? That means people get discriminated against due to things they can't control. But no, Those people should suffer because people want to go clubbing? I understand that there are flaws to my argument, why should all kids miss rather then just a few kids? But there are no ideal solution. You have to put yourself in the shoes of those who it impacts most. How would you feel if you lost your job because someone couldn't sit 2 meters away from their friend. It's just simple social responsibility, I'm not saying hide in your house until it blows over but you just need to have some care for others.

I don't care about getting sick because I'm not at risk, my chances of getting particularly ill from COVID are incredibly slim, statistically I am more likely to kill myself or be murdered than I am to die from COVID.

People who are at risk should be treated differently because they are at serious risk of death, that is just common sense. You wouldn't treat a healthy teen and a 65 year old cancer patient exactly the same because of "inclusion", you would want to put in all reasonable measures to protect the cancer patient. But I do not view it as reasonable to treat everyone as though that are at risk of death because that is going way too far as to what is required. You can protect one while allowing freedom for others.

We would save a lot of money if we supported those genuinely in need of support and allowed everyone else to get on with their lives. Those who cannot work or go to school can be given the support they need be that financially or educationally while the rest of society keeps their productivity allowing those with support to continue to receive support. It would also be far better support since the resources would not be spread so thin over an entire population, they would be focused on those most in need.

We are getting a little off topic here so I will stop. I'm not sure we will ever agree with each others' viewpoint.
Original post by DiddyDec
I don't care about getting sick because I'm not at risk, my chances of getting particularly ill from COVID are incredibly slim, statistically I am more likely to kill myself or be murdered than I am to die from COVID.

People who are at risk should be treated differently because they are at serious risk of death, that is just common sense. You wouldn't treat a healthy teen and a 65 year old cancer patient exactly the same because of "inclusion", you would want to put in all reasonable measures to protect the cancer patient. But I do not view it as reasonable to treat everyone as though that are at risk of death because that is going way too far as to what is required. You can protect one while allowing freedom for others.

We would save a lot of money if we supported those genuinely in need of support and allowed everyone else to get on with their lives. Those who cannot work or go to school can be given the support they need be that financially or educationally while the rest of society keeps their productivity allowing those with support to continue to receive support. It would also be far better support since the resources would not be spread so thin over an entire population, they would be focused on those most in need.

We are getting a little off topic here so I will stop. I'm not sure we will ever agree with each others' viewpoint.


Yes I agree we are getting off topic. And yes your points are valid I just think we see things slightly differently. In terms of Freshers which was the original discussion, I can't see how that it more important then life. In terms of the whole of the UK I do understand how a total lockdown might cost more lives then it saves. It's not an easy choice. In terms of the inclusion thing. Yes you can't treat them the same but I think it's reasonable to ask the young person to make a few sacrifices for the cancer victim. It's not like they chose to be at risk, I would not have the same view if it was say about someone who smokes and is therefore at risk, that is a choice. And yes I agree with your second paragraph, that would be a smarter way to do it. (And thank you for such a civil discussion)

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending