Separate names with a comma.
Assault isn't freedom.
I'm honestly hard pressed to believe this isn't entirely satire at this point. Overpopulation exists, therefore let's allow maskless weirdos to snot all over people and kill them :D
Why isn't assault freedom? Please give me your definition. Obviously it is very complex and there must be certain actions that aren't permissible. I'm curious which ones aren't "true freedom" and why
Assault and theft are the exceptions for freedom.
If you wanna twist it, you're assaulting them with biohazard material from breathing while infected. Would you want someone with AIDS to cover up any bleeding wounds they have? Well, that's uncomfortable for them. So let's allow their blood to leak around some places, if people get AIDS from it, well hey, it's the person's problem for getting it.
If assault isn't freedom, then infecting people with a disease isn't freedom either.
Also, by your overpopulation argument, the Holocaust was a good thing because it cut down our numbers.
Why are they the exceptions to freedom? What made you choose those 2 things? I'm curious
Because they are common sense.
Infection isn't assault. Assault is intentional.
they are common sense? The same could be said about masks. I want an actual answer. Why are they not part of freedom. Is it because they infringe on another person's right to life and property?
so if it's not on purpose you are allowed to hurt people and deprive them of life and property? And that's freedom?
I don't feel sick.
Knowing what we know about COVID, going outside maskless is intentionally infecting people.
Also, lots of people are carriers without showing symptoms. You could have it and not feel sick.
If most people who have it don't know it, and only a small percentage of people will die from it, it's not a big deal.
So can I get an answer. "so if it's not on purpose you are allowed to hurt people and deprive them of life and property? And that's freedom?"
That's one way to phrase "individual liberty above all else".
I never said most people wouldn't know, I said some would. And it's pretty heartless to dismiss over a quarter of a million people, in your country alone, as "a small percentage"
No price is too great.
so if I follow I can hurt and maim anyone I want as long as it's not on purpose. So I could, for example, get as drunk as I want and drive around town being extra careful. If someone gets in my way, it wasn't on purpose.
If you get drunk or high, anything you do to hurt people is automatically considered intentional.
so what if I walk around drunk without a mask?
Getting somebody sick isn't assault. Ever.
That’s completely arbitrary. If I go out during a pandemic while taking no precautions, I’m responsible for hurting people. By your definition, that’s assault.
so what about when people were charged with assault for giving people HIV and not disclosing their status?
Let me rephrase that. Getting other people sick isn't assault, unless you know you're sick.
So only people with positive covid tests should be mandated to wear masks?
And people who feel like they have it.
here is the scary part, you can't know if you have it. Some people are asymptomatic.
Most people are asymptomatic.
so that's the kicker. You can't know if you could infect and kill someone else. So since you can't know definitively if you are infectious - it becomes necessary to have everyone wear a mask. A simple, lightweight, cheap and easy way to help save lives.
How many times do I have to say this? If most people don't know if they have it, it doesn't matter.
but the lives that are lost - do those matter? Or are those just a decimal point to you. If we can save human life- don't we have the obligation to try?
Obesity kills millions each year. Should we outlaw junk food?
you didn't answer my question. Do the lives that are lost matter?
Yes, but freedom matters more than anything. (Except God, but I doubt you believe in Him.)
freedom matters more than anything? But you already agreed freedom does not include getting people sick (knowingly) - and if you can't know if you are sick or not - then isn't the best thing to do wear a mask just to be safe. Isn't the small inconvenience worth a life
As someone with a relative on the verge of death from COVID,I can say firsthand that it’s not worth risking your life for this
“But I doubt you believe in him” oh my gosh it’s petty childish snark meets 92 year old bible thumper levels of condescending. Who are you to question anyone’s faith. Gosh dang.
Our Founding Fathers risked everything to establish this country.
yeah they risked a lot, even they didn't agree you should be able to hurt people. And guess what they didn't believe in unlimited freedom because they owned slaves. Times change man - and we need to protect each other.
I think the issue here @UltraSUPRA is that you’re not really explaining where you’re coming from. You make these declarative statements like “Freedom matters above all else” but don’t explain why you feel that way. Why freedom is more important than saving lives, or why assault isn’t covered under the “freedom is most important” declaration,
or why some things are considered intrinsic freedoms but other similar things aren’t. You state your values as if they’re self-evident fact, but they obviously aren’t, because nobody knows what the hell you’re talking about, which is why you get bombarded with fifty questions after every post
I'll put this as simply as possible.
It's not your responsibility to protect strangers.
So it’s fine if I let my friend run over people because “it’s not my responsibility to protect strangers”
not even from yourself? You sound like Cain bro "Where is your brother Cain?" "what am I my brother's keeper?"
I shouldn't have been saying assault. The correct word is violence.
PANTS RESTRICT MY FREEDOM I DONT WANT TO WEAR PANTS FIRST AMENDMENT MY FREEDOM REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
I've already went through that shtick before.
It literally doesn’t.