You missed my point but my bad, probably, because sarcasm doesn't always come through in the written word. What you wrote is my point exactly.
Our freedoms sometimes are restricted, and properly so, when we're talking about public health and safety. The examples I provided all infringe on individual liberties to some extent - - but they save lives.
We still have a working constitution in this country and there's little to no chance that measures that have been put into place in an effort to contain a once-in-a-century pandemic, and thereby save lives in the process, will lead to permanent constraints. And there's still a ballot box so any politician who is perceived to have gone too far will have to answer to voters on election day.
Finally, what sometimes seems to get lost in the "what about my freedoms?!" argument is consideration and respect for others. What about the essential worker who an asymptomatic carrier might infect? What about medical resources that are exhausted by Covid-19 patients, leaving people with significant non-Covid conditions having to wait for treatment, to their detriment? What about people with heart attack or stroke symptoms who are not calling 9-1-1 (this has been documented in many areas) because they don't want to go to a hospital and risk the virus?
In a crisis like this, and particularly if one professes to be a Christian, it shouldn't be just "me, me, me." Isn't that antithetical to the message of Christ? What about the Golden Rule, or "WWJD?" I don't see or hear many references to that anymore. My point is that reasonable constraints, safeguards and sacrifices (like wearing a mask in enclosed public spaces, for example) can help protect others and save lives. This is basic human decency.