That’s your opinion. It’s not mine. It’s not the opinion of the medical community or the Governor who has the legal authority granted to her by the people through duly enacted legislation to act.
The judge apparently agrees with you, but in my opinion, it’s not the judges appropriate role. The legislature gives the authority to the elected Governor, not the judge. For the judge to overrule the Governor, the judge needs a very strong argument that the governor is wrong. And with so many medical professionals agreeing with the Governor, the judge doesn’t have that.
Supporting the judge overturning the Governor on such a weak assumption contrary to the medical professionals and the stated law is the real tyranny.
You don’t have to agree with the medical professionals or the Governor, but the legal framework shouldn’t be dismissed in favor of a rogue judge on a whim.
Or said another way:
You don’t have to agree with the judge, but the legal framework shouldn’t be dismissed in favor of a rogue governor on a whim.
It's the judge's jurisdiction and purview to review the facts and apply the law. You happen to disagree because of your own biases or interpretation of the law.
Argumentum ad populum is for stupid lemmings
Argumentum ad populum based on flawed/
wrong info (e. g. the corrupt WHO)
is murder, economic destruction, sociopathy etc.
I'm not a doctor, nor did I ever play one on TV.
But I was a science writer for a couple of decades, and I learned the principles and logic of a wide variety of fields. I did some promotional writing on the side, and I actually researched and wrote the hard-bound, 12-page brochure introducing AZT, the first anti-AIDS drug, for the company that produced it, Burroughs-Wellcome. The brochure was for the docs they hoped would prescribe it, and it diagrammed and detailed the choreography between the virus and the molecular structure of AZT.
Anyway, the various recommendations of Fauci and Scarfi don't seem to square up. Their predictions come out wrong if you keep track--which can happen, okay--but their reasoning about dealing with viral outbreaks is often at odds with researchers I have heard and read. What's clear is that they are tight with the pharmaceutical companies and love the idea of vaccines and nothing else.
If you're dealing with huge populations who may encounter hundreds of pathogens in a lifetime, plus spontaneous mutations that the body has to learn to out-smart, vaccines can't do it all.
There are lots of variables, but many states and countries that have not locked everyone down against the WuFlu have had way better results than losers like New York State, where people still tiptoe into stores with masks half-covering their faces like timorous bandits.