Were/are we being lied to?

@cbg
Another possibility is A and/or B are being deceived.

Heck, we all are subject to deception.

Former president Reagan's admonishment should still be heeded: "Trust, but verify."
 
As I said, there are multiple possibilities. Which only makes it sadder that the only option some people can see is deliberate falsehood.
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
But I'm not questioning that. I'm questioning the method of transference. If everything they have said about the method of transference is correct there should be a LOT higher rate of people, both black and white, who attended the rallies with the virus now.
Click to expand...

I can't state this with scientific certainty, but most of what I read in the various journals that I subscribe to, and the conversations I have with health professionals, opinions are stated as facts.

What we do know (as in common sense) is that this virus seems to be transmitted as most others are, human to human contact.

As with most diseases, if one minimizes contacts, one lessens exposure to the disease.

The fact that many people once huddled in their humble abodes did lessen the transmission.

As humans venture back into the world outside their cave, transmission chances are increased, especially if one is part of a large gathering.

Simply walking down the aisles of a grocery store is a more controlled risk, if one doesn't tarry in one spot too long. That means saying hello to friend and moving along smartly, NOT stopping to converse (even hug) for 15-20 minutes.
 
cbg said:
A major part of my husband's job is to take the role of a statistician. He will be the first to tell you that numbers can be made to say anything you want them to say.
Click to expand...

Yes,we pretty much learned this in Statistics 101 many moons ago....
 
There's a new TV show heading our way this fall.

It models itself after Father Knows Best.

Its called, Our Betters Know Best.
 
army judge said:
There's a new TV show heading our way this fall.

It models itself after Father Knows Best.

Its called, Our Betters Know Best.
Click to expand...

That does seem to be the thought process going on at the moment.

Speaking of TV. Cop shows are going to be unwatchable. My bet they will take the tact that Law and Order used to do with almost never a guilty black defendant.

That's going to be really believable on a show like "Chicago PD", not.
 
PayrollHRGuy said:
Speaking of TV. Cop shows are going to be unwatchable. My bet they will take the tact that Law and Order used to do with almost never a guilty black defendant
Click to expand...

Police shows might suffer the ignominious fate heaped upon LivePD, cancelation of the most watched cable TV show ever.

Screw profits as the death spiral towards socialism continues.
 
I'm going to graciously request that you post a link to where the right to NOT wear a mask in a public health emergency is enumerated. I don't recall seeing it in the Constitution.
 
cbg said:
I'm going to graciously request that you post a link to where the right to NOT wear a mask in a public health emergency is enumerated. I don't recall seeing it in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

Do you think a Texas public health agency has the AUTHORITY to require a resident or visitor of The Texas Republic to wear a mask when the governor doesn't?

People are free to wear a mask, if they so choose.

Free people, on the other hand, can't be required to celebrate Halloween for months, not just on a day near the end of October.



The government is limited (thanks to our various constitutions)
 
Yes, actually, I do believe that a public health agency can require people to wear masks even if the governor doesn't.

Still waiting for where the right to endanger others is enumerated.
 
army judge said:
Our betters are unable to lawfully require ANYONE to wear a mask.

US citizens possess RIGHTS.

Don't be bamboozled.

I love Texas.



McLennan commissioners back away from face mask requirement


State constitutions perform an important role in the governance of America's 330 Million citizens and play a critical role in making federalism work. We couldn't get by without them.
Click to expand...
Texas breaks record with nearly 7,000 new coronavirus cases

If Texas doesn't place measures to contain the vastly growing outbreak, you will have a sparsely populated state.
It's a f'ing mask. Why you (general anti-mask people kinda you) whine about putting it on your face is beyond me.
 
army judge said:
Do you think a Texas public health agency has the AUTHORITY to require a resident or visitor of The Texas Republic to wear a mask when the governor doesn't?
Click to expand...

If it doesn't then that is because the Texas legislature has not seen fit to give those health agencies that power. If the legislature chooses not to do give that authority, that is its choice. The legislature could alternatively grant that power and provide sanctions for those who violate the orders. Then in that case the agencies would have that power, and nothing in either the federal or state Constitutions would be violated by that. In short, I disagree with your implication that either Constitution somehow protects the right of citizens not to wear a mask.
 
cbg said:
Yes, actually, I do believe that a public health agency can require people to wear masks even if the governor doesn't.

Still waiting for where the right to endanger others is enumerated.
Click to expand...


That MIGHT apply if someone were contagious, not suspected of being contagious, actually being contagious.

It is also rarely sued.

It was done in my youth when a child was diagnosed with measles, mumps, or chickenpox.

In fact, once upon a time lepers were exiled and quarantined, and those suffering from tuberculosis were hospitalized in what the "state" termed "sanitariums".

Medicine progressed a great deal over the last 50 odd years, so much so that when the the AIDS crisis began, some people wanted AIDS patients quarantined or exiled in the manner of lepers.

AIDS patients, however, were treated professionally and with dignity; and were never exiled.

I need not produce anything, because the proof is that in Texas no law exists (or will ever exist) that allows "our betters" to order others to wear a mask.

Texas did have an "anti-mask" law (to fight KKK and other masked violence) starting around 1925. It was repealed in 1974.

Frequently Asked Legal Questions
 
justblue said:
Why you (general anti-mask people kinda you) whine about putting it on your face is beyond me.
Click to expand...


Just as YOU carp about others whining, I suppose.

That said, until a law exists that requires me to wear a mask, I won't.

I obey all laws.

I ignore all suggestions.
 
army judge said:
That said, until a law exists that requires me to wear a mask, I won't.
Click to expand...

Your choice to that, of course. However, the main point of wearing a mask is to help prevent others from getting sick should you become infected but not yet know it because you don't have symptoms yet. So not wearing a mask tells me you aren't all that interested in protecting the health of those around you. IMO that's a bit sad. But, it is your right to do it until the state mandates you wear one.
 
Tax Counsel said:
So not wearing a mask tells me you aren't all that interested in protecting the health of those around you.
Click to expand...

I own and very often live on an 8,000 head cattle ranch.

My nearest neighbor is 15 miles away.

I make it my life's passion to avoid the vast majority of people.

I protect my property, assets, health, and myself.

I owe no legal duty to protect others, yet I voluntarily isolate myself from them.

My personal sacrifice to protect others is purposefully avoiding them, staying as far away from them as possible, and not interacting with them.

I am not obligated to make such an enormous sacrifice, but that's because I care about myself, which also protects others.
 
No one is suggesting that anyone needs to wear a mask except in the company of others. But given that it is possible to be infected but asymptomatic for up to two weeks before becoming ill, you have yet to convince me that your right to refuse to wear a mask when you are in contact with other people supersedes their right to NOT be possibly exposed to a potentially deadly disease for which there is yet no vaccine, no cure, and limited immunity.

If you never come in contact with another person except your family, fine. Don't wear a mask all you want. But when you do, wear the damn mask. It's not all about you.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top