The rtight to Privacy and Face Mask wearing

[Kinkster90210]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Face Mask Mandate and the "Right-To-Privacy"

OK, I get it: Wearing a face mask is a good idea, about anywhere today. In my mind, about anywhere I am close enough to speak to another person. I am convinced of this, buy into the idea and practice it. I am considered at-risk in several categories, age being the most obvious.

However when wearing a face mask is made a legal mandate it raises some questions.

The Supreme Court has identified the right to privacy as grounds for forbidding any legal prohibition against abortion. They have found that a woman has the right to control her body. The slogan commonly heard is "My body, my choice". Given this established legal decision and the widely accepted cultural or social acceptance of it, why is it permissible to legally require anyone to wear a mask? After all, it is my body, why is it not my choice?

There is another issue at stake as well. If it is legal to require mask wearing . . .with legal ramifications for those who refuse, will it become legal to force everyone to get vaccinated? I myself have a pro-vaccine attitude, but many do not. In years past, there has been a vocal and determined opposition to any vaccination of children. If it is determined that forced mask wearing is permissible, will there be forced vaccinations? Perhaps forced is too strong a word. Coerced might be a better word.

Doing something such as mask wearing or vaccinating because it is the right thing to do is consistent with our historic societal values of independent thought and action. Doing something because it is forced upon us by legal mandate backed by coercion is not.

The mask requirement does not affect any privacy right whatsoever.

You are required to wear the mask in public when you are interacting with others. This means your privacy rights do NOT apply.

There has never been a right to keep your face hidden. Quite the opposite. If you walk into a business, especially a bank wearing a mask, you can be ejected is not arrested.

Privacy rights protect your personal information from disclosure. The appearance of your face, however, is not actually personal information. You can't order people to not look at you as you walk down the street because you want to protect your privacy.

If you want to reframe the argument in terms of personal autonomy rather than privacy, you still lose. There have always been limits on personal autonomy. It ends as soon as you harm someone else. So you can harp about your right to swing your fist in the air, but that right ends where the next guy's nose begins.

Try walking down the middle of the street in traffic rather than on the sidewalk and see how far you get. Try parking your car wherever you want or walking onto any piece of property you want and see what happens.

You can't drive a car as fast as you want or even without a seatbelt.

So, no, your privacy rights aren't affected by wearing a mask anymore than they are by wearing a seatbelt. And your right to personal autonomy won't enable you to disregard the safety of others and spread disease.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

For the same reason condoms aren't issued to prisoners.

So they don't hang themselves with it? Enlighten me please. Had to bail out somebody a few days ago. He said he was put on a bench with about 10 other people. Side by side. No masks. Seems there is gross hypocrisy. They told him if he waited another 6 hours he'd be released on his own recognizance.

Originally Posted by ICU 812

....

Nudity or footwear are not issues here. Freedom of choice , as guarenteed by the Bill of Rights IS the point.

Went out for lunch and spoke with the hostess who sat us. Her mother was a 50-something who works in a nursing home. She said they had 140 people in the home and are now down to 65. Many died but not all from COVID even though the home instituted protocols. With all the nursing homes around Texas, and looking at the data, I suspect a lot of people marked as COVID deaths died and continue to die in nursing homes.

I wanna see an audit and an analysis. Stop the fear porn.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You can wear your mask all day long in stores and if you are infected you can still spread the virus.

You can comply with speeding and drunk driving laws to the n'th degree and if you step behind a wheel you can still kill people.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I assume your conclusion is based on a statistical analysis.

Statistical, as well as experimental analysis like this,

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article...iaa644/5848814

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Excessive speed and driving while drunk/impaired have been DETERMINED to be contributing factors to the deaths assigned to the incidents ..... not so with Covid19.

Au contraire. Someone not wearing a mask was DETERMINED to have infected 52 out of 61 people at a choir practice, two of whom subsequently died. There are many more examples out there like this.

People not wearing masks have been DETERMINED to have infected over 10 million people year to date, hundreds of thousands of whom have died.

Two hair stylists who had Covid 19 and who were wearing masks were DETERMINED to have NOT infected 140 customers.

A passenger on a flight from Toronto to China who had Covid 19 and who was coughing was DETERMINED NOT to have infected other passengers.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Great points have been made here on all sides (and some that are just entertaining).

I have used the word "Forced" in several posts. Perhaps a better word would be "coerced". As in fined or , as suggested by another, required of children before enrolling in school. I had to get a number of vaccinations before some business related international travel in the past.

I'll concede the mask issue as a weak argument. I still think mandating mask wearing is a violation of my civil rights though, even as I keep fresh masks in my cars along with Purell and Clorox wipes . . .and use them.

In the end, I am still opposed to the idea of surrendering my personal liberties, hard fought for by our founders and contemporaries, for the sake of "the copmmon good" as defined by someone else.

You're an intelligent and respectful poster, apologies in advance if I'm too blunt. I don't understand why this is a big deal. You get caught without a mask and you get up to a $250 fine in Texas. They're not even enforcing the regulation where I live. You're not giving up sacred personal liberties, any more than you are when you're fined for speeding, not wearing a seatbelt, or drinking a cold one while driving. If this and similar issues are why our founders and contemporaries sacrificed their lives (and fortunately they're not), then they flushed them down the drain.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by ICU 812

Great points have been made here on all sides (and some that are just entertaining).

I have used the word "Forced" in several posts. Perhaps a better word would be "coerced". As in fined or , as suggested by another, required of children before enrolling in school. I had to get a number of vaccinations before some business related international travel in the past.

I'll concede the mask issue as a weak argument. I still think mandating mask wearing is a violation of my civil rights though, even as I keep fresh masks in my cars along with Purell and Clorox wipes . . .and use them.

In the end, I am still opposed to the idea of surrendering my personal liberties, hard fought for by our founders and contemporaries, for the sake of "the copmmon good" as defined by someone else.

When that "someone else" is the SC in a ruling that says the federal government can issue such an order for the common good, then that is what I accept and live by. Anybody that doesn't want to accept that, can suffer the consequences.


Is this a great country or what? You get to choose to comply or chose not to and suffer the consequences until your case is heard by the SC where you will lose, have no money left and still go to jail.


God! I love America!


The above was meant to be sarcasm, well, some of it.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

When that "someone else" is the SC in a ruling that says the federal government can issue such an order for the common good, then that is what I accept and live by. Anybody that doesn't want to accept that, can suffer the consequences.


Is this a great country or what? You get to choose to comply or chose not to and suffer the consequences until your case is heard by the SC where you will lose, have no money left and still go to jail.


God! I love America!


The above was meant to be sarcasm, well, some of it.

I believe you said you think the SC would rule in favor of mask regulations 9-0 or 7-2 if that issue were brought before them. That makes sense. As I posted earlier in this thread, many years ago it ruled in favor of forced vaccination, and given that you'd think they'd damn sure allow mask laws.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Tiny

I believe you said you think the SC would rule in favor of mask regulations 9-0 or 7-2 if that issue were brought before them. That makes sense. As I posted earlier in this thread, many years ago it ruled in favor of forced vaccination, and given that you'd think they'd damn sure allow mask laws.

I believe it is settled law that the government can in case of a health emergency, mandate certain behavior. I would be shocked if that were not the case. Whether wearing a mask is 100% effective is not relevant. If it has any effect in stopping the virus, it is worth mandating the wearing of a mask IMHO. I personally will not enter a business that does not mandate a mask.

[Grace Preston]

Lets be honest-- the mask debate is more political than anything. Had this come up 20 years ago.. we'd never be having this debate. But in the age of social media-- we now have a plethora of armchair doctors and lawyers that graduated from the Facebook Academy of Law. We have a world of information at our fingertips... and on that same line-- we have a world of misinformation. It has become easier to dig in our heels rather than work together.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Grace Preston

Lets be honest-- the mask debate is more political than anything. Had this come up 20 years ago.. we'd never be having this debate. But in the age of social media-- we now have a plethora of armchair doctors and lawyers that graduated from the Facebook Academy of Law. We have a world of information at our fingertips... and on that same line-- we have a world of misinformation. It has become easier to dig in our heels rather than work together.

Would it be politically incorrect of me to say "those are some nice gams"?


Oh, and I like your mind too!

[JCM800]

[Ripmany]

Wat private just burry you self six feet deep.

[JCM800]

[dilbert firestorm]

jcm.. you must be bored.

[oeb11]

Originally Posted by Grace Preston

Lets be honest-- the mask debate is more political than anything. Had this come up 20 years ago.. we'd never be having this debate. But in the age of social media-- we now have a plethora of armchair doctors and lawyers that graduated from the Facebook Academy of Law. We have a world of information at our fingertips... and on that same line-- we have a world of misinformation. It has become easier to dig in our heels rather than work together.

Agree with HF!

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by matchingmole

If abortions ever become contagious...this might be an issue

If stupidity ever becomes contagious you're a walking time bomb. Dumb on, lol.