This should be done to protect the life and save the lives of all other citizens. Innocent lives shouldn’t be put at risk due to one person or a few people. Even though it may seem immoral no life is greater than another and the majority should be protected over the minority. When should civil liberties be overlooked or should they ever? Although civil liberties are a very important factor of human moral rights, they should be put on hold when it comes to public health and the common good of the people. The government has done many things to erode on the fundamental rights of people when it comes to the health of the public such as isolating and quarantining individuals, making mandatory vaccination laws, invading privacy and even going as far as using law enforcement to help retain and keep a hand on these infectious deadly …show more content…
In Howard Markel’s book Quarantine he explains how there was a point in time in which immigrants coming into New York were isolated and kept in squalid conditions to help prevent the spread of cholera and typhus. This quarantine gave immigrants limited freedoms and limited rights to certain things due to their predicaments and being put in these isolated regions away from others. Also in the text, Ebola vs. Civil Liberties it states, “Having committed no crime, having done no wrong, you are sentenced to house arrest or banishment. It is unfair. It is well, well un-American. But when an epidemic threatens, we do it because we must.” This quotation deliberately explains why those who are infected during an epidemic are violated. It is a must. Though it may be morally wrong and goes against the American rights and traditions it is only done to protect the public health and the majority citizens and the continuation of the disease