I was pointing out the fallacy of polarizing two sides (false dichotomy) and made my point by bringing an example I think you agree with me on. I don’t think anyone here believes necessary surgeries should be delayed, even if Ontario’s health department made the (socialist) decision to sacrifice some to save the many.
What you are missing (or ignoring) is that there is a cost in human lives to delaying "non-emergency surgery" (which is the reason they were scheduled in the first place).
If your approach (which I happened to agree with) is based on ignoring evidence that contradicts it, you have no more legitimately in making the argument than an anti-vaxxer (which is a shame because of the damage that does to the good points you have made). This is especially true because you have repeatedly accused those who disagree with you as not caring (enough) about human life.
To be clear, I don't think you were intentionally being dishonest. I was pointing out the natural human tendency to discount information that contradicts our priors. I had hoped that you would recognize what you were doing (and to your credit, you did in the beginning of your post) but then you doubled down.
ETA: typed before you modified your post. Mods, please feel free to split