Mask mandate needed again
By Letter to the Editor on August 7, 2021.
Editor:
We need a mask mandate in all indoor public spaces, and proof-of-vaccination requirements in certain high-risk environments, such as indoor dining.
I am sick and tired of having to stay home so that all the selfish jerks can go out and do whatever they want, leaving a trail of illness in their wake. I’m tired of public policy being dictated by the most obnoxious and belligerent among us, while the most vulnerable among us can’t even run to the store without worrying about some unvaccinated jerk breathing all over them.
The rules should be these: You don’t want to wear a mask? You stay home. You don’t want to get vaccinated? You stay home. The rest of us who actually care about others can then be free to safely live our lives.
P.S. If I see you out in public indoors without a mask, I will assume your lack of basic hygiene extends to not washing your hands after using the toilet. Gross.
Marcie Wallace
Lethbridge
-1
Assume away commandant. Advice for you, stay home yourself.
the ignorance and self serving righteousness of the letter is far more the affront to hygiene than people not taking covid vaxes. the position presented begs some questions: if YOU are vaxed, why worry about whether others are vaxed? do you understand that the vaxed can carry and spread covid virus, too (not because of the vax, of course)? do you have as much ignornace to direct at those not vaxed for measles, polio, etc?
the letter exudes an adverse quality that breathes far more dangerously than “some unvaccinated jerk”. i agree with buck on this: stay home yourself.
Marcia Wallace said: If I see you out in public indoors without a mask, I will assume your lack of basic hygiene extends to not washing your hands after using the toilet. Gross.
Speaking of assuming, and based on your whole letter, I’m going to assume you’re a self righteous twit.
I also agree with Biff when he said, “The letter exudes an adverse quality that breathes far more dangerously than “some unvaccinated jerk””.
hey seth – good to have you back 🙂
Lately, I’ve just been lurking. There were a few moments in which I was going to write a reply, then thought, “Meh…I can’t be bothered”. However, this letter drew my ire. lol
You may be pleased to know, that I agree with most of what you have said on this matter. Without going into too much detail right now, I see the whole thing as a profound over reaction in which 99% of the population were harmed, and will be harmed for a very long time, in order to slightly extend the life of a few that were already deathly ill.
“The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”
-Spock-
glad to be aboard with you
Hate to break it to all you rebels-without-a-pause, libertarian guys on this forum, but a majority of Canadians AGREE with Ms. Wallace. A recent Nanos poll in Thursday’s globe showed that 59% support and another more polite 19% somewhat support denying unvaccinated people access to public gatherings like sporting events or indoor dining.
Masking, restrictions and vaccines HAVE consistently reduced numbers all across the board, throughout several waves, and come ON, how hard is it to just wear a frigging mask anyway?!
And to what else but vaccination do you attribute the current “pandemic of the unvaccinated” that is ramping up as we speak, prolonging if not creating an exhausting fourth wave? Great. Thanks a lot. Have you expressed yourself sufficiently yet, all you rogue gamblers rolling the dice on exactly how YOUR particular immune system, or those of your loved ones will react to this even more rogue virus?
Has it ever occurred to you to simply respect the social contract that exists among all of us as herd animals, who are indeed beyond tired of catering to you selfish, arrogant types whose oppositional defiant disorder has apparently been “triggered.”
Unsurprisingly, Albertans were also the laggards on seat belt legislation.
How about the next time you write a reply, you actually state who you’re replying to? If you included me in your rant, then say so. That way, I can at least provide counter arguments.
With that said, I believe Biff is correct in stating that this type of person is dangerous. Not necessarily dangerous due to her various assertions, but rather, dangerous due to her irrational assumptions and seemingly hateful attitude. Both are dangerous characteristics that lead down the proverbial slippery slope of serious human rights violations.
Seth, do you not realize that the slippery slope argument is one of the weaker forms of argumentation? Homework assignment: Read up on “Logical Fallacies”.
It’s not a black and white logical fallacy. It could be true or false depending on the other statements that the person made. Given the author’s irrational assumptions and seemingly hateful attitude, then the slippery slope argument is not only apt, but accurate.
Above and beyond that, in order to make a logical fallacy argument, I have to be refuting an assertion. I didn’t refute any of the author’s assertions. I merely made an observation of the author’s attitude, and pointed out what those characteristics can lead to.
yes the powers at be have had greater success in converting people to their viewpoint with covid than they had with climate change. a great experiment iin people control.
Ad hominem attacks and name calling, as in calling people you disagree with jerks or righteous twits, have no place in a civil conversation.
https://youtu.be/09maaUaRT4M. Best 20 minutes of your life.
Uhh, no. This clip is basically warning against incipient “totalitarianism” and “menticide” from “our political elites,” meaning the government and the media, which is the same old, same old classic paranoia, but here’s the thing. The very same people who are railing against this takeover of our minds are from the political right wing, which has itself been “taken over” by Trump, so are a textbook example of the “mass psychosis” being discussed! So sorry, but the “Academy of Ideas” just uses reputable and respected scholars to try and elevate the current, reigning conspiracy theories.
I do think that there’s just WAY too much information out there, we’re literally deluged by it, and it turns out that a lot of people HAVE reacted to that in exactly the way the clip describes, which is irrationally or even psychotically.
I would also suggest that a few more of us have been able to sift all this info better as a result of doing it much more, all of our lives, reading and writing i.e., and so have simply developed better filters, and more perspective generally.
Packaging up complex philosophical ideas into a slick 20-minute YouTube video, absent of any depth of analysis or reference to counter-arguments, is the equivalent of intellectual pablum. And watching that video wasn’t even remotely close to the best 20 minutes of my life, the details of which shall remain between me and my partner.