Pope Francis Speaks Out On The Coronavirus And Anti-Mask Protests

[Motherwit]

Motherwit:

A lot of countries require people with exemptions to wear a recognizable lanyard around their necks

OK. But the Pope evidently didn’t want to wear one (and I support him in that).

Pope Francis likely experiences breathing difficulties at times only having one lung so he’d have good reason.

So the question remains, what about everybody else?

Is that OK for the rest of us too
to be without identification bands or neck exemptions, or whatever?

But by what logic would one refuse to do it? If you knew that wearing a mask was helping to stem the spread and giving the vulnerable a better chance at surviving, what trumps that?

 

[Cathoholic]

Pope Francis likely experiences breathing difficulties at times only having one lung so he’d have good reason.

I’m very supportive of the Holy Father choosing for himself him sometimes wearing masks and sometimes not wearing masks for whatever health reason he wants to.

But the issue remains.

Can everybody else take their health issues and choise to sometimes wear masks and sometimes not wear masks in public settings too?

.

But by what logic would one refuse to do it?

I don’t know what logic the Pope uses when he chooses to wear a mask on certain occasions and choose NOT to wear a mask on others.

That’s his call and I support him either way.

 

[Motherwit]

Can everybody else take their health issues and choise to sometimes wear masks and sometimes not wear masks in public settings too?

No one who has a conscience would be so oppositional. There would be the guilt of deliberately playing fast and lose with other peoples lives.

 

[Cathoholic]

No one who has a conscience would be so oppositional. There would be the guilt of deliberately playing fast and lose with other peoples lives.

Was this “guilt” there last year with Influenza virus too which has killed MANY people as well?

Or did that “guilt” just begin this year?

How about two years ago with RSV virus which is particularly deadly to newborns?

The life-years lost at least in the USA with corona virus are zero.

This is not true of RSV which takes babies away (thus resulting in MANY life-years lost).

What was the guilt-factor two-years ago?

 

[Motherwit]

Motherwit:

No one who has a conscience would be so oppositional. There would be the guilt of deliberately playing fast and lose with other peoples lives.

Was their this “guilt” last year with Influenza virus which has killed MANY too?

Or did that “guilt” just begin this year?

Anytime we refuse to follow protocols, during any kind of community emergency situation, we’d be guilty.

 

[Cathoholic]

Anytime we refuse to follow protocols, during any kind of community emergency situation, we’d be guilty.

Whose “protocols”?

So is Pope Francis OK not wearing a mask one day and wearing a mask the next? (I am good with that.)

Is that OK for everyone else too?

 

[Motherwit]

Motherwit:

Anytime we refuse to follow protocols, during any kind of community emergency situation, we’d be guilty.

Whose “protocols”?

The legitimate authorities tasked with safeguarding the common good.

So is Pope Francis OK not wearing a mask one day and wearing a mask the next? (I am good with that.)

Is that OK for everyone else too?

If someone has a legitimate condition that is made worse by wearing a mask, allowance is made for that. But just to be defiant and oppositional, that should be pinging in ones conscience, as a moral fault.

 

[Cathoholic]

The legitimate authorities tasked with safeguarding the common good.

Ya mean ourselves?

Or do we need to be taken care of?

WHO gets to be the “legitimate” authority here?

.

If someone has a legitimate condition that is made worse by wearing a mask, allowance is made for that.

So it’s OK for me to choose what is a “legitimate condition” on a given day,
but on another day, with the same “condition”
choose to reject that mask?

That’s all good right?

 

[Motherwit]

Motherwit:

The legitimate authorities tasked with safeguarding the common good.

Ya mean ourselves?

Or do we need to be taken care of?

WHO gets to be the “legitimate” authority here?

The different levels of government are the legitimate authority it in case and they are advised by the relevant experts.

Romans 13 1-7 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; 4 for it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority[a] does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only because of wrath but also because of conscience. 6 For the same reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, busy with this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is due them—taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

Motherwit:

If someone has a legitimate condition that is made worse by wearing a mask, allowance is made for that.

So it’s OK for me to choose what is a “legitimate condition” on a given day,
but on another day, with the same “condition”
choose to reject that mask?

That’s all good right?

Well yes. For example some days asthma can be worse than others.

 

[Cathoholic]

The different levels of government are the legitimate authority it in case and they are advised by the relevant experts.

Yes. But so what?

Where were those relevant experts last year when people were dropping off with influenza.

Were they trustworthy THEN?

If so, WHY change?

Just less frequency in cases? That sounds cold. (What about those who died from the flu?)

Were they not trustworthy THEN but are NOW?

Which principles should I accept?

They are mutually exclusive unless you agree that some of the deaths are “acceptable” or else are beyond our reasonable control.

.

Cathoholic . . . .

So it’s OK for me to choose what is a “legitimate condition” on a given day,
but on another day, with the same “condition”
choose to reject that mask?

That’s all good right?

Motherwit . . .

Well yes. For example some days asthma can be worse than others.

But what about checking with the Government, officials, protocols, and all of that?

What “official” needs to tell you how bad YOUR (not “your” personally but generally) asthma is today?

And what if I am an asthmatic wearing a mask one minute, and have bronchospasm.
Then the next minute (again in public) I want to take it off?

Now what?

Which government official should I call to make sure I can now remove the mask I was wearing based on Roman’s 13?

(What if I don’t have a cell phone? Am I “defiant and oppositional”, and lacking in “conscience, as a moral fault” for not having a phone? Or not calling upon Government to tell me what to do that minute?)

Or should it be our decision?

 

[Culter]

“What matters more: to take care of people or keep the financial system going?” he asks. He has harsh words for governments that prioritized the protection of the economy, saying they “mortgaged their people.”

As a Christian the choice should be obvious, but it is astounding how some just can’t accept this scriptural position with faith in God.

Don’t we use money to take care of people? If people are out of work, don’t we have more people to take care of with fewer resources? Your statement wasn’t very well thought out.