Am in full support of efforts to provide information about effectiveness, risks, and side effects of covid vaccines.  I also think governments have a duty to provide prudent norms--within limits--for shaping society towards the common good.  But, given the novelty of both the virus and the vaccines, together with the incredible complexity of the human body and the permutations of individual health situations, and informed by the current data regarding severity and survivability of this virus, as well as the historical records of vaccine rollouts with the need for progressive improvements, I fail to see how we are in a position to see that a blanket mandate is a prudent exercise of the authority of the Commonwealth.

Questions of prudence are always ones about which reasonable men may legitimately disagree, therefore a mandate in this case seems rather inappropriate.  Once the general will of the Commonwealth has had a chance to exercise prudence as best it can and custom has set in, then perhaps a mandate could be appropriate.  

But given the large number of opposing voices--voiced even here on this petition--as well as a far from uniform opinion among medical professionals (evidenced not least by nurses and doctors resigning rather than be forced to receive a vaccine), and the general toxicity regarding exercises of political authority even here in the Commonwealth, is it truly in the public interest or is it truly proportioned to the common good to overrule those voices, marginalize those professionals, and give substance to accusations that those in authority act for their own interests rather than for the common good?