Actually there have been a number of legitimate studies showing that spread of flu virus in the workplace is inhibited by mask wearing. That is what the current covid policies are based on. There have been no actual trials re the covid virus and it's spread and mask wearing. Personally, I don't have an issue wearing a mask in a building or any other confined space where the public may be but I think wearing masks outside, in open areas, is a bit ridiculous.
There have been viruses in the past and people also wore masks with penalties for violators.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/03/us/mask-protests-1918.html#:~:text=As%20the%20influenza%20pandemic%20swept,in%20political%20and%20cultural%20wars.&text=The%20masks%20were%20called%20muzzles,them%20to%20dogs%20in%20mockery.
And after 1918, much research showed that areas that had mask mandates did no better than places that did not.
In short, the big takeaway after 1918 was that masks don't work. And here we are, seeing that same thing again. Are masks working? Everyone's wearing them, and yet cases are soaring across the globe.
My store, my rules! wrote:
You all believe in private property, right? And that means I can run my store as I see fit (so long as I don't break the law).
If you don't like my shirt/shoes/mask policy, you of course may patronize another store. And I will pay a price by losing your custom.
Thank you for insisting that customers follow basic health precautions. If you didn't, I would stop shopping at your store because it would be risking my health.
I also think it is fair to say that masks are not an "unreasonable precaution" when there are legitimate concerns about hospitals' ability to deal with the number of severe COVID cases they're seeing. It's easy to say that masks are "infringing on mah rights," but that argument doesn't go far when there are people who need ventilators and can't get one.
You obviously haven't been paying much attention to the new thinking on ventilators, which is that they kill FAR more often than they save.
Rainy Day wrote:
You can deny service for not wearing a mask.
Can you deny baking a wedding cake for a gay couple because it’s against your religious beliefs?
I don’t have a problem with either, but I don’t like the media hypocrisy.
You really don't see the difference? It would be against the law to enforce mask wearing selectively to people based on their gender, race, sexual preference, age, physical disability, or religion.
bkrunner wrote:
My final point is a simple one: wearing a mask is easy, and refusing to wear one makes you seem pretty wimpy. No one is forcing you to bow to a king, work in a labor camp, or fight an unjust war. They're asking you to wear a face covering when in close proximity to others. Toughen the F up.
Toughen the F up, says the sheep...
ATTENTION READERS: This is what we call a red herring argument. The poster has selectively picked a part of the OP that seems to be related, but isn't really part of the argument itself. The main argument of the OP is that we should be cautious because hospitals are overrun. The poster would like to distract from that argument by starting a debate about the efficacy of ventilators.
huh what wrote:
I also think it is fair to say that masks are not an "unreasonable precaution" when there are legitimate concerns about hospitals' ability to deal with the number of severe COVID cases they're seeing. It's easy to say that masks are "infringing on mah rights," but that argument doesn't go far when there are people who need ventilators and can't get one.
You obviously haven't been paying much attention to the new thinking on ventilators, which is that they kill FAR more often than they save.
Person 1: "I refuse to wear a mask because this is America and I am not a sheep."
Person 2: "The pandemic is serious, and we are still learning about the most effective preventions. As such, I will accept a slight inconvenience in the hopes of contributing to the common good.
You: Person 2 is a sheep and Person 1 is a super tough patriot.
bkrunner wrote:
ATTENTION READERS: This is what we call a red herring argument. The poster has selectively picked a part of the OP that seems to be related, but isn't really part of the argument itself. The main argument of the OP is that we should be cautious because hospitals are overrun. The poster would like to distract from that argument by starting a debate about the efficacy of ventilators.
huh what wrote:
You obviously haven't been paying much attention to the new thinking on ventilators, which is that they kill FAR more often than they save.
The stated justification for masks is that they are necessary to reduce case loads, lest we run out of ventilators.
I counter that this is an unreasonable concern, as we do not need to concern ourselves with ventilator supply since we know they are not a useful treatment.
This is not a red herring, it's a direct response to his reason for the necessity of mask laws.
bkrunner wrote:
Person 1: "I refuse to wear a mask because this is America and I am not a sheep."
Person 2: "The pandemic is serious, and we are still learning about the most effective preventions. As such, I will accept a slight inconvenience in the hopes of contributing to the common good.
You: Person 2 is a sheep and Person 1 is a super tough patriot.
Crap logic.
You are showing how much of a sheep you are by turning it into politics.
Maybe I misread your previous post, but I thought you called someone a sheep for wearing a mask.
Yugo wrote:
bkrunner wrote:
Person 1: "I refuse to wear a mask because this is America and I am not a sheep."
Person 2: "The pandemic is serious, and we are still learning about the most effective preventions. As such, I will accept a slight inconvenience in the hopes of contributing to the common good.
You: Person 2 is a sheep and Person 1 is a super tough patriot.
Crap logic.
You are showing how much of a sheep you are by turning it into politics.
If you truly believe that ventilator supply is the only reason people are concerned about caseloads, then I don't know what to tell you.
huh what wrote:
bkrunner wrote:
ATTENTION READERS: This is what we call a red herring argument. The poster has selectively picked a part of the OP that seems to be related, but isn't really part of the argument itself. The main argument of the OP is that we should be cautious because hospitals are overrun. The poster would like to distract from that argument by starting a debate about the efficacy of ventilators.
The stated justification for masks is that they are necessary to reduce case loads, lest we run out of ventilators.
I counter that this is an unreasonable concern, as we do not need to concern ourselves with ventilator supply since we know they are not a useful treatment.
This is not a red herring, it's a direct response to his reason for the necessity of mask laws.
IdiotNation wrote:
questions, questions wrote:
The government mandates people wear seat belts when they are in their own private vehicle. There are some municipalities that have no smoking ordinances, even in public places. There are carpool lanes with fines for those that violate the rules about the number of passengers in the vehicle. What's the difference?
There is no difference, of course. It is idiots (whether they know it or not) blindly following other idiots and the Head Idiot. It's that simple.
Reminder, smarty-pants idiots: NO ONE is out of a job because of mask wearing. And the same science that you benefit from every day says that tens of thousands of Americans are dead because not enough were. You should be so proud of your proudness.
People have committed suicide because of the mask mandate. I would suggest you educate yourself on how common incestuous rape is. Read the book, The Body Keeps the Score. The book goes over how young girls deal with the trauma. There are people walking around who get PTSD reactions from having to wear masks, that don't even know they were raped. if you think the nonsensical mask nazis having the audacity to get into people's faces and demand they put on a mask and say that they are lying about health issues has not caused any suicides. God help your soul.
ScaredPunksss wrote:
People have committed suicide because of the mask mandate. I would suggest you educate yourself on how common incestuous rape is. Read the book, The Body Keeps the Score. The book goes over how young girls deal with the trauma. There are people walking around who get PTSD reactions from having to wear masks, that don't even know they were raped. if you think the nonsensical mask nazis having the audacity to get into people's faces and demand they put on a mask and say that they are lying about health issues has not caused any suicides. God help your soul.
This is what desperation and delusion looks like, folks. If your argument against mask wearing is "but incestuous rape!", you've lost the plot.
Speechless wrote:
ScaredPunksss wrote:
People have committed suicide because of the mask mandate. I would suggest you educate yourself on how common incestuous rape is. Read the book, The Body Keeps the Score. The book goes over how young girls deal with the trauma. There are people walking around who get PTSD reactions from having to wear masks, that don't even know they were raped. if you think the nonsensical mask nazis having the audacity to get into people's faces and demand they put on a mask and say that they are lying about health issues has not caused any suicides. God help your soul.
This is what desperation and delusion looks like, folks. If your argument against mask wearing is "but incestuous rape!", you've lost the plot.
You are the one who has lost the plot. Hopefully you will not have children.
My store, my rules! wrote:
You all believe in private property, right? And that means I can run my store as I see fit (so long as I don't break the law).
If you don't like my shirt/shoes/mask policy, you of course may patronize another store. And I will pay a price by losing your custom.
Shut up, democrat.
What are you afraid of? Get that mask back on!!!!
bkrunner - you are fighting a battle that's be going on since April on LetsRun.
Most of us just laugh and ignore the COVID trolls by now, but a few (you, Harambe) carry the torch for the rest of us. I appreciate your work.
It's clear that anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers, and people who subscribe to other fringe beliefs are getting something out of it. They must feel like part of a community or gather some sort of personal significance from absorbing and promoting baseless theories.
So here's a 100% genuine question for all the anti-maskers on this thread: What are you personally gaining when you promote these views online? What part of your brain is being stimulated or massaged or rewarded through this activity?
(I know your first instinct will be to tell me to "do your research" or to call me a "sheep" or tell me to "stop watching mainstream media" or insist that your views are not actually crazy. Please set aside that instinct for a moment and answer the question, because I'm actually curious.)
Speechless wrote:
What part of your brain is being stimulated or massaged or rewarded through this activity?
Bump. Anyone?
I like to stimulate and massage myself as I read the news and see the thousands of homeless, unemployed and relapsed addicts the lockdowns have created.
Help me out here with some more material.
My store, my rules! wrote:
You all believe in private property, right? And that means I can run my store as I see fit (so long as I don't break the law).
If you don't like my shirt/shoes/mask policy, you of course may patronize another store. And I will pay a price by losing your custom.
Agree, but eventually liberal lawyers and judges will attack.