The truth about wearing a mask -finally

bmac said:
Not to be picky, but Henry, isn't the section of the article you added pertaining to health care providers in the presence of symptomatic or asymptomatic patients, not the general public? That's the way I read it. I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

The specific article was based on the healthcare system. But the principle remains the same, a mask will prevent an asymptomatic person from infecting others. It wasn’t my choice of source. ElCapitan posted it using the first lines (And ignoring the rest) claiming it was scientific proof masks don’t work.
 
I find this thread very interesting. People have the right to form their own opinion and to follow that. Whether it's to wear a mask or not.

While interesting, IMHO this thread would be a tad bit better if we stopped insulting a person for his opinion because it's different from yours.

Just sayin'
 
Golfman25 said:
I am sure you are aware that our right are not unlimited, but carry some responsibility on the citizen. It's the old "can't shout fire in a crowded movie theater" and claim free speech. HOWEVER, whenever a government chooses to restrict our constitutional rights they must do so with a compelling governmental interest and narrowly tailor that restriction to meet the interest. So trying to control a pandemic is a compelling government interest. The question is are the restrictions they have placed on us narrowly tailored? In many cases they are not and are over broad and unconstitutional.
Click to expand...
I am aware. I'm also aware that you cannot limit someones 1st amendment rights for the "thought" of someone potentially shouting "fire" in a movie theater or a public space. Are you advocating that no one should be allowed in a movie theater because they may shout 'fire'?
 
Great Lakes said:
They’re god given rights when you’re born an American citizen. Since you wanna take them away why don’t you point to where it says when another American citizen is scared, that citizen has the right to take away your rights. I’ll wait..

The difference is I don’t wanna take anything from you. If you’re afraid you’re gonna die from this then stay inside. That’s your right. My right is to live freely as an American. See how this works. You’re happy, I’m happy and we can move forward.
Click to expand...

“God given rights you were born with”? I won’t even ask you which God your theory is based on. Did you miss your entire elementary and secondary education that covered government and laws and us history? The only rights you have are those granted under the constitution and laws of this country. And BTW there is no constitutional right to privacy. All we have are specific laws that cover specific privacy topics. The very fact these laws exist is precisely because there is no fundamental constitutional right to privacy.

So I can’t be taking away anything you never had.
 
OllieC said:
I am aware. I'm also aware that you cannot limit someones 1st amendment rights for the "thought" of someone potentially shouting "fire" in a movie theater or a public space. Are you advocating that no one should be allowed in a movie theater because they may shout 'fire'?
Click to expand...
No I am not. Just outlining the constitutional jurisprudence. In general, I think the government has gone too far to long. Unfortunately there are many sheeple out there who will follow whatever they are told by "experts."
 
Henry Boyd said:
“God given rights you were born with”? I won’t even ask you which God your theory is based on. Did you miss your entire elementary and secondary education that covered government and laws and us history? The only rights you have are those granted under the constitution and laws of this country. And BTW there is no constitutional right to privacy. All we have are specific laws that cover specific privacy topics. The very fact these laws exist is precisely because there is no fundamental constitutional right to privacy.

So I can’t be taking away anything you never had.
Click to expand...
Holly chit. You can't be serious. Go read the Declaration of Independence.
 
Great Lakes said:
They also make it seem like your mask is disgusting and should never be touched and if it is then you need to wash your hands immediately. So let me get this straight, this disgusting piece of fabric is right near my mouth and nose but that’s ok. Just don’t touch it...
Click to expand...

That is a point the must wear mask crowd does not get, these mask wearing clowns touch them constantly then touch all the fruit and vegetables in the produce department,GROSS...
 
Golfman25 said:
Holly chit. You can't be serious. Go read the Declaration of Independence.
Click to expand...

Ah dude, you should have paid more attention in school. The Declaration of Independence is a document created by the thirteen original British colonies to state their independence from the British Crown. While having great historical significance, it has no standing in US Law.
 
Henry Boyd said:
You’re right. Science is wrong, doctors are wrong. You are smarter then they are. But then we have a secret coup de tat going on, so you can be excused.

Oh and please cite the part in the Constitution, or US law, that supports the idea we have an inalienable right to infect those around us with a fatal disease.
Click to expand...

"nor be deprived of life, liberty", the Liberty not to wear a mask, fifth amendment.

Apparently you need to brush up on the definition of inalienable rights endowed by our creator...
 
The constitutional principle actually in play is "Police Power", which is the right of the states under the Tenth Amendment to regulate and enforce order, particularly in this context regarding public health. The Supreme Court has rarely chosen to try and interfere with this right.

The precedent that focuses on the subject of this thread is Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which stemmed from the state's enforcement of a compulsory vaccination law established in response to an ongoing epidemic. The court held that "in every well ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand" and that "Real liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own, whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others." (My emphasis)

This case has already been used during Covid as the basis for a Federal Court of Appeals decision to uphold a Texas regulation that halted abortions during the state's ban on non-essential medical procedures. I imagine it will be tested again in the near future.
 
Last edited:
MonacoMike said:
"nor be deprived of life, liberty", the Liberty not to wear a mask, fifth amendment.

Apparently you need to brush up on the definition of inalienable rights endowed by our creator...
Click to expand...

Ah, the Fifth Amendment covers self incrimination. A fuller portion of the sentence you clipped showing the context:

“No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or trial for the same offense; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary ...”

That says nothing about “inalienable rights endowed by our creator”. This is a specific right given to Americans by men, elected by the people and acting for the people.
 
Henry Boyd said:
Ah, the Fifth Amendment covers self incrimination. A fuller portion of the sentence you clipped showing the context:

“No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or trial for the same offense; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor be obliged to relinquish his property, where it may be necessary ...”

That says nothing about “inalienable rights endowed by our creator”. This is a specific right given to Americans by men, elected by the people and acting for the people.
Click to expand...

Forcing one to wear a mask because you are afraid is depriving one of liberty without due process. Simple as that.

Off to work on the boat now, I'm out...
 
You think mask work others don’t think so. Thats the beauty of America. That’s your right to think that and I also appreciate that right.

I will not wear one and you can if you want to. When the government tells you it’s safe outside then you can come out and remove your mask.

This doesn’t have to be difficult.
 
Two-day old paper in Science: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/05/27/science.abc6197

In addition to documenting the benefits of universal masking, the paper is critical of the WHO's current recommendations, asserting it is based on research from the 1930's. In particular, it is critical of the safe range for social distancing and suggests we should perhaps widen our standoff intervals.
 
I guess we all now know how that caveman felt when someone pointed at his junk and, for the first time in human history, yelled, “PUT A MASK OVER THAT DAMN THING!!”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,154
Messages
1,427,389
Members
61,061
Latest member
Rod01
Back
Top