Does Humankind Need the Coronavirus?

What's to discuss?

There are procedural methods of dealing with the issues you discussed. If human rights needed to be violated, there would certainly be less destructive ways of approaching it.

Every time some liberal arts discipline has pretended to be a STEM field, with graphs, indexes, pie charts, and projections, you mean?

What I mean is that instead of the death penalty and the workhouse, which both kept established (because these things aren't predictable) criminals from reproducing or at least reduced their status, we then establish eugenics and abortion randomly killing the 'unfit' due to characteristics which someone basically drew out of a hat. The procedural element--the law and its penalties--has been made 'humane,' but the burden of the societal effects of this are foisted onto another, innocent party. The criteria for whether this party lives or dies follow no consistent or testable rules, but lend themselves to a purely statistical reality well enough.

That's what I mean. Your justification is similar. These effects are all the result of bad governance, corporate law-breaking, corruption, bribery, etc. A very small group of people. The virus 'solves' the problem, by attaching the costs of this behavior to someone at any rate, then making them the poster-child for whatever new, failed, loophole-ridden scheme was predesigned to handle it. Great.

Intentional solution to an avoidable problem, likely foreseen far ahead of time.