And the science says...

[frugal-one]

I'm not certain because I don't spend any parts of my day looking for confirmation but I'm thinking it's possible that your "anti-maskers" may not have a problem with doing the right thing and wearing a mask, they just don't think it should be mandated.

In normal instances, I would agree. A pandemic is not normal and this is life and death in some cases. Err on the side of caution.

[frugal-one]

Well, it is an effective way to make a point. Protesting being forced to do something while doing that something rings hollow.

At the expense of your health... I don't think so.

[jp1]

Well, it is an effective way to make a point. Protesting being forced to do something while doing that something rings hollow.

So in other words, in conservative world they are heroes risking other people's lives by (not wearing masks even though they may be asymptomatic carriers) to make a point? With heroes like those who needs enemies.

[Alan]

If I didn't like the speed limit on the road through my village, what would be an appropriate method of protest?

How about if I don't think speed limits should be mandatory?

Then do everything you can to get your point across, especially if you're sure enough of your beliefs to willingly suffer the consequences. That's how it works in free societies.

[Tammy]

Please remember that we still don’t know immunity stays with us for the long term.

[Alan]

So in other words, in conservative world they are heroes risking other people's lives by (not wearing masks even though they may be asymptomatic carriers) to make a point? With heroes like those who needs enemies.

I don't know what conservative has to do with it, if you want to make it political I think it's more of a libertarian leaning.

[bae]

I don't know what conservative has to do with it, if you want to make it political I think it's more of a libertarian leaning.

I thought libertarians did not in general approve of the initiation of force against others.

How does the libertarian belief system handle viral contamination - where the carrier may not know they have it, where contact tracing is thin at best, and where no direct consequences are likely to fall on someone who spreads the infection? In the face of a requirement to wear a face covering in crowded public spaces where contamination is likely?

Do libertarians even handle public spaces, and their regulation, in this sort of case?

We've had some incidents here where store-owners were hassled by maskless customers demanding entry. Seems the store is private property, to a libertarian, and these libertarian mask-protesters would be keen on supporting the store owner's rights to impose conditions upon the entry onto his property.

Turtles upon turtles.

[Alan]

I thought libertarians did not in general approve of the initiation of force against others.

That's my understanding.

How does the libertarian belief system handle viral contamination

I don't think viral contamination respects belief systems. It's probably not the virus that's being protested against.

[frugal-one]

From what I heard was he was asked to wear the mask everywhere. He chose to take it off and then (as usual) made up the remark about only wearing where it was required. Kind of like at the Mayo Clinic where EVERYONE wore a mask and he chose to put everyone at risk. And, this person calls himself a leader......

Our stupid "leader" at it again!
https://www.mediaite.com/trump/day-a...r-wearing-one/

[jp1]

I don't think viral contamination respects belief systems. It's probably not the virus that's being protested against.[/COLOR]

No. What's being protested is the requirement that people take action to minimize the likelihood that they will harm other people.

I'm reminded of the old saying "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins". Perhaps the modern day counterpart is "your right to not wear a mask ends where your potentially infectious breath enters my airspace."