In trouble how?

Nobody voted for a lot if things. Most things aren't voted in.

Yes they did.

We have representatives.

States have rights in emergency situations to make ordinances.

The issue is not following the constitution

War is inevitable. You will lose

You just didn't read your state emergency plan well enough.

The fuck?

> War is inevitable. You will lose
@JPMcGlone Am I the only one bothered by this?

I have school work to do. Later all.

I dont know about the specific rule you are living under JP, but where I am we must wear masks in specific situations and it's because we are trying to stop a virus causing people to be sick and die and stuff while also trying to live our lives a little bit. Most people cooperate. Those who dont are rare and will be subject to some sort of penalty because the best knowledge we have available at the moment is that masks can help.

I’m busy eating but lol @ nudity law is preventative but masks is... not preventative... but tyranny *noted*

Learn new things everyday

Lol

I’m bothered with being forced to give up my liberty and the expectation isn’t that I fight back.

We ought to be honest about what the terms are

“You get in trouble” is a childish answer Malachi.

If you don’t obey these laws, they will go after your life, or after anything you have a right to. Just admit it man

Walking around with a virus isn’t a crime, ola

Rape is

That’s a huge difference, no? @ola

No.

Nudity is rape.., the gems keep coming. *Noted *

No, what the law aims to prevent is rape

The mask laws aim to prevent death. Not murder

Rape is a poor analogy. In fact, I dont think it is one at all tbh.

I didn’t make the analogy

The point is simple. If we can impose force on anyone because walking around means people might die, we can impose force on everyone

It is not a crime to have the flu or to have COVID

And if it is, then we’re all potential criminals, including the ones enforcing the law

Your tyrannical system inevitably ends in war. Start stocking up now

You did make the rape analogy.

What Malachi and I were trying to point out was that laws exist that limit liberties - for good reasons of course. More specifically preventative laws exist that limit liberties. In that way a nudity law and a mask law are the same.

Because I’m an intellectually honest person, or try to be

A better line of argument for you JP would be

That the distinction is not preventative or otherwise. The distinction is limiting freedoms vs FORCING actions ( wearing masks, compelled speech etc)

But then you would have to admit that limiting crowds of 10 is ok while forcing mask wearing is not

Malachi - this was just a counter thought in my mind. Your thoughts @Malachi ?

I think that the distinction here is public spaces. But to be honest our lives are limited in private as well.
To be frank, JP is under some insane 'maximal freedom all the time' type of philosophy that doesn't play out in the real world.

To me he is playing the game of "I'm not touching you, I'm not touching you" and he thinks he won't get slugged in the gut anyway. at that point it doesn't matter who is right, it matters what we allow in our society.

Ok. But I’m just wondering if what I said would be a reasonable objection