Correct? To… delay conception? According to… you?

I am not comfortable leaving decisions like that to others.

The prevailing theory, at least at the time, was that widespread vaccination would reduce spread and protect everyone including the unvaccinated.

In that case, it could make sense to force people to delay if it means everyone ends up better off overall.

I know you didn't mean this the way it sounded. I know you are probably well educated and think your choices are obvious. I will only state that I have very strong feelings towards someone who tries to force a decision like this on someone else.

I did - nothing personal obviously, but the problem is that ultimately no matter which side you pick you will have tradeoffs that some people will agree with and some who'd suffer disastrously as a result - just like the flip-side (assuming the initial theory is correct) could potentially involve a lot more deaths and cause just as much grief to families/etc.

Of course in retrospect the point is moot because in practice the majority of countries mismanaged their Covid response and we ended up with the worst of both worlds - the negative effects of lockdowns/mandates/etc without them being followed/enforced enough to actually have any significant effect at eradicating the disease.

Again, no offense intended (and you have the right to be angry), just trying to explain the other side of the debate; there's a tradeoff to be made and either side will have downsides (though IMO in retrospect neither was enforced well enough and as a result we ended up with the worst of both sides without any of the benefits). Ideally there would just never have been a virus and then we wouldn't have to think about these trade-offs at all, but now that it appeared, those decisions had to be made, rightly or wrongly.

Do you actually know this to be true?

But then, they probably thinks it's true regardless.