You seem to be struggling with the fact that objective morality is a social construct. It's not about WHO makes the decision. It's about the inherent quality o

You seem to be struggling with the fact that objective morality is a social construct. It's not about WHO makes the decision. It's about the inherent quality of the decision being made irrespective of who makes it. Of course it's your choice to drive your car into a wall at 200km/h, but in the way society uses the word "objectively" and "true" it is objectively true that driving into a wall at 200km/h is detrimental to your well-being. And it is objectively true that in doing so you are making a bad decision. In the same way that is objectively true that seatbelts save lives, it is objectively true that vaccines save lives. Therefore not doing what's conducive to your well-being is a bad choice. The metrics, measurements and methods used to arrive at these conclusions are as objective as empiricism allows for. >Those who don't want to vaccinate also choose to do so because it improves their well-being Yes. They using the exact same words. Are you convinced by their arguments? I am not. What I am convinced of is how intellectually dishonest they are in parroting words without bringing evidence to the table.