sadolite

" laws and due process change and can vary all over the world"  Since when are my civil rights and liberties dictated by other countries? 

 "Ordinances in the interest of public health are lawful." Yes they are, when due process has been used and the legislature approves them. A unilateral decree by an individual is neither.

LIBERALISM is "a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law.   Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support free markets, free trade, limited government, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), capitalism, democracy, secularism, gender equality, racial equality, internationalism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of religion."   Huh, interesting , the majority of those beliefs are called far right extremists views from what I an told and lectured to by self espoused liberals.

Just for clarity, wearing masks and locking down businesses isn't about saving anyone's life but only to slow the spread and prolong the inevitable? There is no cure, correct? You are not saving anyone's life by wearing a mask or closing down a business. All will eventually be exposed  and they will die or they wont. Is this correct?  The reason I ask this is because people keep saying I don't care about other peoples lives because I don't want to wear a mask. Wouldn't wearing  a mask just be virtue signaling and a personal demonstration of submission? You aren't potentially saving a life by wearing it. 

I'm 56 and live on cigarettes and diet Mountain Dew. I work in the marble and granite industry and breath granite and engineered stone dust all day for the last 20 years.  fit as a fiddle.  It's Saturday, I have to go do something useful now like build some shelves for my shed that I built with no permit. I'm like that, tell me I cant and I will. I am more fit than people half my age.

I know you don't know what the issue is. Civil liberties and rights don't mean anything to you. Due process of law doesn't mean anything to you. 

My opinion on the matter is irrelevant. There are only 9 people in the country that are relevant to your question. What the people think such as you or me  is not relevant.

test

Um no, I just proved science is deciding via proxy through govt how I should live my life.  I have no choice to make, moral or immoral. I will wear a mask or be subject to  fines, imprisonment, denied service, denied employment and pretty soon forced entry into my home by govt officials all on the recommendation of science. Broward county in Florida passed a law saying you have to wear a mask in your own house. All based on a recommendation from science.   The clause itself states:

You said science can not decide my morals, I just proved it is. I can not decide based on sciences recommendations as to weather I can wear a mask or not.  Science tells govt what to do, govt tells me what to do.  My last analogy is spot on. Science can say what ever it wants and suggest to the govt it take some action. Then people who believe everything with the words "experts say" or "experts suggest" or "scientists believe" at the beginning of a sentence who are in govt,mandate I have to do what they say. People like you for instance. Your attempts to dismiss me by attacking my intelligence or my mental faculties are only a reflection on you not me. If I cant question "your science" you are not presenting science.

Um science is deciding that I am a danger to everyone around me if I don't wear a mask without so much as a physical examination. If that passes as  science I no longer believe anything science says about anything.

Well if you say I am wrong I guess that pretty much settles it.  But I didn't  argue anything to be wrong about. I simply asked how "my body my choice" can be reconciled with regard to being forced to wear a mask.  On a side note, are you saying if science makes some doomsday prediction and recommends some sort of action they then by proxy will  decide what my civil liberties and rights are? For example: Science says cars that run on gasoline will destroy the atmosphere, science recommends doing away with all cars that run on gasoline. Govt under their recommendation makes all cars that run on gasoline illegal.  I no longer have a right to buy a car of my choice but must buy some govt mandated POS that doesn't serve my needs at all.

Physical harm and having your feelings hurt are not the same thing.

Which ones? They all say different things

I think the overwhelming response is pretty much obey authority blindly , don't question it and fuck your rights and civil liberties. I guess that response pretty much reconciles it for most.

If I am to be determined a threat to the public, am I not entitled to due process of law?

Killing yourself harms no one but yourself

It is also the opinion of thousands of others that say it does nothing to wear a mask. Who is wrong? and why?

My ego? It's a question

This day in history.   Geraldine Ferraro named vice presidential candidate>> Rewrite:  Some racist white cunt tried to become assistant slave master to black people.

So lets hear how people reconcile forcing people to wear masks.  It's my body and my choice.  It is many peoples opinion that aborting human life is murder.  The argument in favor of abortion is "My body my choice" If you are wearing a mask and believe you are protected by wearing it, why do I have to wear one?  It is your opinion that my not wearing one some how puts your life at risk. I don't want to wear one "My body my choice" Please reconcile. I would like to point out that by deciding to have a baby it does affect other peoples lives so forget that argument.

I said I am entitled to due process of law to be forced to wear a mask. I never said no matter what. I keep arguing the state must show cause that I am a danger to the public and you keep ignoring that.

Never read a study that didn't show exactly what they wanted it to show.  You say the Governor has the power to unilaterally take what ever means he deems  necessary to stop the spread of a pandemic according to how you interpret the law.  Euthanizing all people who test positive would stop the spread, using your interpretation of the law, what is to stop a Governor from doing so if he or she deems it necessary? And please spare me that is to extreme, Governors put people to death all the time, they are afforded that power under the law. Of course due process must come first. The people can not be trusted to self quarantine or wear masks properly so in the interest of public safety all people who test positive should be euthanized.

 "all powers not specifically given to the federal government, " Due process of the law is a federal law not a state law. It is a constitutional right and supersedes all state law. You are arguing using the law you stated that a state Govenor can declare everyone and anyone is a threat and quarantine anyone for any reason with no due process. Your interpretation makes the the Governor  a dictator with unlimited power. This is simply not the case and is patently false. 

There is no text anywhere that addresses  what you ask for in terms of legal arguments. There is also no text to support your legal claim

Just so you know, Declaring a state of emergency does not do away with due process of law nor does it give unilateral power to the Governor of any state to write new laws. They still have to follow established legislative protocols.  All it does is give power to unilaterally move resources and spend money without legislative approval. I repeat it does not give power to write new law. Due process is still in place. If you are really serious about Covid 19 why doesn't the Governor just unilaterally declare all people who test positive to be euthanized to stop the spread. I see no difference in the legal argument in forcing me to wear a mask. The stated goal is to stop the spread, Since the govt doesn't have to abide by due process as you argue what is to stop the govt from euthanizing people who test positive? No feelings based arguments please or that's to extreme, those are opinions, not legal arguments. The govt kills and  puts people to death all the time.

More importantly  is wear does it say I have to wear one without due process of law. Look I get you don't give a shit about your rights. It must be proved I am a threat to the public. If I am, then put me in quarantine.

Last I checked due process of law is a constitutional right. The law says it must prove beyond all reasonable doubt that I am a threat to society. It's your opinion that I am not afforded this right.

Ya I just read an article that the death rate from covid 19 under the age of 45 is near 0.  And in other news I read an article that we will have to wear masks for years. If I have to choose between wearing a mask for years and you or anyone else getting covid 19 I choose that you or anyone else gets covid 19. This would be akin to mental torture to be forced to wear masks for years. If the govt does this it must provide them all free of charge to everyone. I will not spend my own money to buy masks. I am not funding govt regulations with my own after tax money.

Your OPINIOINS based on all conflicting information on Covid 19 are noted

I've always said a person willing to work for minimum wage is worth every penny.

I am not advocating anything, no one knows jack shit and everyone's opinion on what to do isn't worth jack shit, including the so called experts. I am not asking a question about masks I am saying that mask manufactures don't endorse anything that so called health experts are saying about masks. And with that said I will go back to what I said in the beginning forcing me to wear a mask against my will without due process of law is a violation of my constitutional rights. I also believe it is a form of torture.  It is not natural to wear a muzzle over your face 8 hours a day 5 days a week or even longer for month or years on end. This could last for years and there is no reason to believe it wont. 

All the research and science surrounding Covid 19 is clearly subjective as no one can agree on anything, most especially the so called experts. They are all using the so called same facts to come up with their differing opinionated recommendations.  The only people who are 100% in agreement on any aspect of Covid 19 are mask manufacturers and what masks do and don't filter Covid 19.

What ever you say, I believe mask manufactures. They are bound by hard irrefutable science and liability. The Govt paid health experts are bound by nothing and can say anything with 0 liability. They are not even bound by ethics or their own Hippocratic oath. 

I wear a mask when I cut granite with an angle grinder.

How do I know when I am going to die? Doctors say people will die all the time and they live for decades

The history lesson to be learned here which I and about 12 other people in the world since the beginning of time  have learned is this. Never give power to govt that allows them to point guns at peoples heads and force them to do anything without probable cause the due process of law.

Like I said earlier, I believe the mask manufactures. The masks that are not designed to filter corna virus don't filter corna virus. Go ahead and call me a science denier all you want.  It wont change the fact that masks not designed to filter corna virus wont filter it. And yes the govt cant point a gun to my head and make me wear a mask. But that doesn't change the fact that I am entitled to due process under the law that I am a threat to public safety  either.

Ya I understand it stops spit, it doesn't filter the virus.

Masks not designed to filter viruses don't filter viruses. Scientific fact. Best I can figure is that you have be indoctrinated to believe the virus is all contained in the spit and that if you block all the spit you are blocking the virus.  The virus is also airborne. When you breath out and have Corna virus you exhale Corna virus. I believe what mask manufacturers say. They  have to take both legal and personal responsibility for giving bad information. Politicians and so called health experts paid by the govt have no skin in the game and nothing to loose by giving false or erroneous information. Mask manufactures in no way support , confirm or endorse  anything the govt says about wearing masks that don't filter corna virus. I believe them . I will repeat,  When a mask manufactures says their mask will neither protect me from or Filter Corna virus I believe them. You can believe politicians and paid govt officials who have no skin in the game if you want, they will suffer no personal liability if they are wrong. Mask manufactures will.

Why is the scenario completely unreasonable? Viruses are a part of life on earth. Viruses are everywhere all the time waiting for a hoast to infect. Wearing a mask continuously would help prevent any new pandemics from happening so we can make sure this never happens again

I answered your question, you just don't like the answer

A mask that doesn't filter Corna virus doesn't filter Corna virus., Scientific fact ask any mask manufacturer. They will never make the claim that it in anyway filters the virus. I don' t give a shit what politicians say.

Its a dumb analogy, you cant predict when you will die. Me personally, I have accepted that killer viruses are part of life on earth and there is no point in destroying everyone's financial futures to try and not get them. Shutting down business has caused infinitely more human suffering than corona virus ever will. People who say its better to err on the side of caution never have any skin in the game and nothing to loose by doing so.  Untold millions have everything to loose by erring on the side of caution. Better for those who would die from the virus to die than those who wont and have their entire financial future destroyed.

I am 55 and I consider it a form of torture. It's inhuman to make a person wear a muzzle over their face that restricts  breathing 8 hours a day 5 days a week or more.

The use of personal attacks and character assassination. This is the most commonly used tool in debate and discussion. The reason it is used is to dismiss the adversary thus implying anything they say is not viable and should be rejected without cause or consideration. The weakest and most intellectually bankrupt form of response or argument.  

"It is always better to err on the side of caution"  Translation:  To obfuscate all personal responsibility for the untold human suffering you are about to cause.

Prove I am a threat

UM no, it's exactly on topic, You want me to forgo and give up my civil liberties and constitutional rights for promises of security and safety from the corona virus.  I do not consent to closing my business and I do not consent to wearing a mask. I demand due process under the law, I demand that the govt show that I am a risk to anyone, I demand the govt show cause to shut my business. I am entitled to all of these things under the rule of law.  I do not loose my civil liberties and rights because there is a pandemic.

I challenge all the suedo science that says I can control the spread of a virus.  You roll over without so much as a fight. You literally are doing what hundreds of history books said you would do. You trade your rights and liberties for promises of safety and security.  History repeating itself right before my eyes.  Men born long before you or I knew these things and knew human nature.  "A man who gives up his freedoms and liberties in exchange for safety and security deserves neither" They knew, it's the oldest trick in the control the people and make them comply handbook. Now that the precedent has been set and it has been demonstrated how fucking easy it was all the powers that be have to do is concoct some bogus health crisis tell you the sky is falling and your all gonna die and you will roll over like a dog that wants his belly scratched.