Shutdown consequences are now worse than potential benefits

Our current shutdown brings ethical issues to the surface. The COVID-19 statistics are heartbreaking. Over 1.4 million American cases and over 85,000 lives lost. Each one represents someone’s loved one.

Yet there is another statistic that is sometimes overlooked. Thirty-six million. That’s the number of unemployed since this began. Again, each one represents someone’s loved one who has not received a paycheck for nine weeks and is forced to choose between paying the rent, electric or grocery bill.

The curve is successfully flattened. Our hospitals are not overwhelmed. Still, I don’t want another life lost to this disease. Vulnerable people should continue to shelter in place. No one is forcing people to go out. The only thing being forced upon us now is the relinquishment of our freedoms.

I do not know if the governor’s directive carries the weight of law. What

I do know is that human law is not autonomous.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said “an unjust law is no law at all.” It is derived from natural law which, among other things, informs us that people have an inherent right and freedom to work.

If our freedom to work is taken away, when is civil disobedience appropriate? My answer, at present, is that civil disobedience would be justified if the basis for the shutdown is no longer warranted, the unintended consequences are worse than the potential benefits, or the lockdown is being applied unfairly.

Sadly, from what I see, that day may soon be upon us.