Mandatory mask poll

  • Thread starter Thread starter jgaw1234
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Good luck with that. No food. No water. No electricity. How long would this quarantine last?
 
You understand what I am talking of. Confinement as we had already experience. And of course people have food, electricity and water.

But a person who don’t want to wear a mask in a shop/public place should stay at home. She is unable to make her sunday duty, because it is a mandate to wear a mask in churches- and very logical to protect the many old people there.
 
Anicette said:
But a person who don’t want to wear a mask in a shop/public place should stay at home.
Click to expand...
Fortunately it’s not a mandate here and I’m free to go out without a mask. Now, there are a few businesses who choose to have mask policies which means I need to wear the stupid thing if I want to enter. So I comply.
 
ForeverLearn said:
That is quite a leap to make. However, if I play along and accept it, not wearing a mask potentially still affects more people by directly killing them, and allowing for a global pandemic to continue to spiral out of control, which kills many more.
Click to expand...
I don’t know, ForeverLearn. A couple of issues come to mind. One the one hand, we might be able to say that not wearing a mask may potentially affect more people but I’m not sure we could argue that it directly kills people.
Then there is the numbers issue. I wonder if pitting the many against the few (in our example case of one killed child and possibly many ill people works well within a Catholic framework?
It seems, in my mind, to be a utilitarian argument (the greatest happiness of the greatest number).
These are just a few ideas that I am grappling with-I can’t say that I have any answers right now-just questions I am pondering.
May God bless you and all who visit our thread.
jt
 
RuthAnne said:
That’s how it should be, but according to this poll, most people don’t believe we should have the right to make our own decisions.
Click to expand...
There are many areas people should not have the right to make their own decisions that affect other people in public. That is why public nuisance laws, like disorderly conduct, public intoxication, loitering, and why smoking is banned in public places. Everyone’s rights will end where another person’s, or a lot of people’s, rights begin.
 
I know. It’s all about control. It’s all about giving up liberty for security. People who are willing to fritter away their liberties for security deserve neither.

But never fear, Mommy and Daddy are going to come in and save the day for you.
 
Last edited:
RuthAnne said:
Mommy and Daddy are going to come in and save the day for you.
Click to expand...
In case you missed it, the majority of the people believe mandatory compliance is needed. So this little bit of childishness in an attempt to demean others misses the crucial fact that we are our own “Mommy and Daddy.”

No, this issue is not about control. If you believe that, then you miss everything. It is about health, life, and death. Here is the kicker, you do not get to impute motives onto others.
 
RuthAnne said:
But never fear, Mommy and Daddy are going to come in and save the day for you.
Click to expand...
This isn’t nearly as clever as you seem to think it is. We get it, you’re a radical anarchist. Stop imputing motives onto everyone who disagrees with you.
 
pnewton said:
In case you missed it, the majority of the people believe mandatory compliance is needed.
Click to expand...
In case you missed it, I already made that point.
pnewton said:
So this little bit of childishness in an attempt to demean others misses the crucial fact that we are our own “Mommy and Daddy.”
Click to expand...
Not really. Yall vote for your mommies and daddies.
pnewton said:
No, this issue is not about control.
Click to expand...
Oh, but it absolutely is.
pnewton said:
It is about health, life, and death.
Click to expand...
It’s like the joke I shared, and I’ll share it again:

A guy asks his doctor, “When will the Covid pandemic be over?”

The doctor replies, “How would I know? I’m a doctor, not a politician”
pnewton said:
Here is the kicker, you do not get to impute motives onto others
Click to expand...
Sure I do. I just did.
 
RuthAnne said:
I know. It’s all about control. It’s all about giving up liberty for security. People who are willing to fritter away their liberties for security deserve neither.

But never fear, Mommy and Daddy are going to come in and save the day for you.
Click to expand...
No. My Mommy and Daddy aren’t stepping in to save the day. I — who unlike you have actually paid attention to the science and am aware that (1) You wearing a mask protects me from being exposed if you have COVID but don’t know it yet because it begins with a contagious-but-not-yet-symptomatic phase; and (2) A growing body of evidence shows that you wearing a mask protects you from being infected by others — have discovered that there is someone out there who blithely and irresponsibly proclaims the alleged “right” to expose me to a potentially fatal disease. So I am resorting to legal processes to protect me against a bully who insists on risking my life.

You don’t want to wear a mask? Fine. Stay home. You do not have a “right” to expose me to COVID — which is what you’re risking whenever you venture out in public maskless, because you don’t know you don’t have COVID even if you were tested yesterday — any more than you have a “right” to build a campfire during a drought, to drive your car while drunk or high, or to leave a loaded gun in a place where children can get access to it.

In the end, our judgment will be based on how we treated our fellow humans. See Matthew 25:31-46. Did we welcome the stranger, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, treat the sick, visit the imprisoned, and generally “love your neighbor”? Or did we refuse to do any of those things?

Your “You can’t make me wear a mask” attitude is the exact opposite of the behavior of the Good Samaritan and the Sheep on Jesus’ right; it’s a direct example of the behavior of the Goats on Jesus’ left hand. By venturing out in public without a mask, you are leaving the robbers’ victim to die (“You can’t make me save him hah hah hah”), you are rebuffing the stranger, you are ignoring the homeless and sick, you are consigning the imprisoned to loneliness, and so on.

Jesus was clear: if someone smites you on one cheek, offer them the other as well. We aren’t even smiting you; we’re just saying to wear a mask. That’s a lot more gentle. Offer up your cheeks and wear a mask. Refusal to do so is un-Catholic.
 
Godfollower said:
I — who unlike you have actually paid attention to the science
Click to expand...
You have no idea what science I have studied. Unless you have some magical power that I’m unaware of.
Godfollower said:
You don’t want to wear a mask? Fine. Stay home.
Click to expand...
No. The current law allows me to move about freely without a mask. And that’s what I do . . . for now.
Godfollower said:
You do not have a “right” to expose me to COVID
Click to expand...
If that means by not wearing a mask, I do have the right. For now, anyway.
Godfollower said:
or to leave a loaded gun in a place where children can get access to it.
Click to expand...
FWIW, I keep a loaded gun in a dresser drawer where my kids have access to it if they need it.
Godfollower said:
In the end, our judgment will be based on how we treated our fellow humans.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. I could not agree more.
Godfollower said:
Did we welcome the stranger, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, treat the sick, visit the imprisoned, and generally “love your neighbor”?
Click to expand...
Do your above mentioned magical powers tell you how many strangers I’ve taken in, fed and clothed? Do you know how many nursing homes I’ve visited? Do you know how many prisoners I’ve ministered to?
Godfollower said:
“You can’t make me wear a mask” attitude is the exact opposite of the behavior of the Good Samaritan and the Sheep on Jesus’ right; it’s a direct example of the behavior of the Goats on Jesus’ left hand.
Click to expand...
That is predicated upon me accepting your science. I don’t accept it.
Godfollower said:
we’re just saying to wear a mask.
Click to expand...
And I’m just saying, no.
Godfollower said:
Offer up your cheeks and wear a mask. Refusal to do so is un-Catholic.
Click to expand...
So, I suck as a Catholic according to your definition. I’m not worried.
 
Last edited:
RuthAnne said:
Not really. Yall vote for your mommies and daddies.
Click to expand...
For my mother - Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with you. Blessed are you among women and blest is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinner now and at the hour of death.

For my “daddy”, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.
 
Godfollower said:
Offer up your cheeks and wear a mask. Refusal to do so is un-Catholic.
Click to expand...
Wearing or not wearing a mask is not a moral question. Please stop trying to paint everyone without a mask as immoral. It is both uncharitable and incredibly judgmental.
 
vz71 said:
Wearing or not wearing a mask is not a moral question. Please stop trying to paint everyone without a mask as immoral. It is both uncharitable and incredibly judgmental.
Click to expand...
Fascinating. On what planet is deliberately risking another person’s life “not a moral question”?

The science is clear to anyone willing to listen.
“Like herd immunity with vaccines, the more individuals wear cloth face coverings in public places where they may be close together, the more the entire community is protected,” Robert Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and two colleagues wrote in an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association, also published on Tuesday. Because cloth face coverings can also allow states to more safely ease stay-at-home orders and business closings, Redfield told a JAMA Live webcast Tuesday, “If we could get everybody to wear a mask right now, I really think in the next four, six, eight weeks, we could bring this epidemic under control.”
Click to expand...
This absolutely is a moral question. Will you participate in saving lives, or will you continue to risk the lives of innocent people? That’s the very definition of a moral question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top