As long as you personally stay in your home and do not interact with anyone else non-socially distanced or without a mask on, and you're not a licensed to provide a service to the public, or attending a public institution, then I would say you should have the moral right not to be vaccinated for a highly contagious and moderately deadly virus.

BTW, if you catch Tuberculosis you will be forced into house arrest and the health agency will force you to zoom call for every pill you take once you are released after 3 months.

I plan to get it but am waiting for a single long-term (1 year or more) study to be published first

You are not vaccinating to protect the vaccinated, but those who _cannot_ be vaccinated, or who are not responding to vaccination.

For example, people with inmmunodeficiencies and autoimmune conditions, who are immunocompromised. Not sure, what the status on pregnant women is, but I would guess neither.

AFAIK, cancer treatments are affected, and some cannot be treated as they conventionally would.

So, it is weighing the rights of people who could get vaccinated to put up with a minor nuisance, but don't want to for personal reasons, against the rights of people who cannot get vaccinated and face potential critical health problems because either not being able to get the right treatment of their underlying disease, or simply directly being more and longer exposed to a potential deadly disease for them.

Additionally, by being unvaccinated, you are part of the pool of potential virus-carriers, and the larger the pool the larger the chance of mutations. That combined with a vaccinated population + evolution means more likely a mutation resistant against the vaccination.

Regarding pregnancy, We won’t know about the long term effects there for years

They are doing just fine with various rent seeking behaviors in my country. I don't need to rent them my body as well.