You make a lot of interesting - and downright illogical jumps - in your post.
Science is on everyone's side.
I agree - and that statement has nothing to do with what I said.
I said, "It reminds me of people who claim that "the science" is on their "side".
I was talking about "the science" - which is the new authoritative view regarding political hacks posing as scientists and telling everyone else how to live their lives - not "science".
For example - the idea that the wearing of masks stops or slows the spread of COVID and other viruses - the data from actual experimentation of this idea is spotty and tends to go in the direction that masks do nothing to stop or slow the spread of any virus.
However - "the science" declared - as if it were a dictator - that masks are good and helpful and everyone needs to wear them and if people are not wearing them they should be harassed, removed, expelled, fired, arrested, etc.
It is similar to Christianity - I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ is on everyone's side - but there are those among the "Christians" who claim to know "the truth" and to be "the authority" and they start to judge and condemn others.
There is no difference.
Not all scientists agree. Not all "religionists" agree.
However, there are those among scientists and religionists who declare what "the truth" is - based on their opinion/interpretation/circumstance - and that they themselves are "the authority" of that truth and they start to tell other people what to believe and how to live.
I said "the science" - not science.
Christian extremists don't like a lot of science because it interferes with their beliefs.
A lot of scientists also don't like a lot of scientific theories postulated because they interfere with their opinions and theories.
A Christian who disagrees with "the science" is not "an extremist".
Of course - there are "Christian extremists" out there - no question - but I get the feeling that the metrics you would use to cast that blanket term are vast and vague.
Well reasoned and fact-based opinions are valuable. Opinions based on feelings or tradition, or disinformation like Qanon are not only worthless, but toxic. This is why reason is important. Its why education is important. It's why a good reputation for being rational is important.
Cloth and paper masks are practically useless at stopping or spreading the transmission of viruses.
However - because of political hackery - the opinion of an incompetent "doctor" - who hasn't had a patient in decades - became the de facto "law of the land" - because people gave up their reason and their rights due to the fear-mongering.
It was all opinion based on feelings and disinformation.
No one has a monopoly on opinion based on feelings, tradition or disinformation and no one has a monopoly on well-reasoned and fact-based opinions.
Well you seem to be one of those people who think Fauci is evil, and that masks infringe on person freedom, and that vaccines aren't safe or effective. Am I wrong?
I cannot say whether or not Fauci is "evil" - but decades of being in the public sphere have proven that he is incompetent and narcissistic to the extreme (He always had pictures of himself displayed behind him during interviews at his home).
Not only that but he has been proven to be dishonest about his involvement in the development of COVID-19 and other research projects and that he was complicit in the media covering up his involvement.
He has also become addicted to power over the last couple of years - but that could happen to anyone who is given too much authority.
I cannot look into his heart - so I don't know if he is "evil" - but I do know that he is an incompetent liar who narcissistically worships himself - believes himself to be "the science" - and he likes telling people how they can live their lives.
The wearing of masks does not infringe on anyone's personal freedom - forcing people to wear masks - based on nothing but fear and political hackery - is an infringement.
Vaccines have been safe and effective - but the COVID "vaccines" were proven to be ineffective in regard to getting or transmitting the virus - meaning that even the vaccinated can get and spread the virus - so there is no reason to mandate that anyone get it.
What we put into our bodies should be a personal choice - unless it can be proven to safeguard others - which the COVID "vaccines" do not.
So - yes - I would say that you are wrong in your assessment.
If I am correct then you are a victim of right wing disinformation.
No - you are just spinning leftist talking points that are not rooted in fact or logic.
No one on "the right" is claiming that masks and vaccines are bad - only that it is wrong to force people to wear masks and to put experimental substances - that don't do what they were described to do - into their bodies against their will.
Hey knock yourself out. But what is hypocritical is those insisting they don want government telling them to wear masks for public safety but are fine with government forcing women to give birth to a child ever if raped. No freedom to feel whatever gender a citizens desires, because that is government's law to impose.
I don't believe that a government should force its citizens to wear masks to stop or slow the spread of COVID because masks have been proven to be ineffective in stopping or spreading COVID.
Social distancing does work - as does hand washing/sanitizing - so the government could impose such requirements in local, State and Federal buildings.
However - businesses and churches should be able to make their own rules - even to the wearing of masks - without government interference - and being outdoors is super safe - no need to get involved there.
There should always be a balance between public safety and personal freedom - all maintained by facts - not feelings and opinions of incompetent political hacks posing as "doctors".
And the government should always -
always - be against the murder of innocent people.
In regard to the case of rape - actual rapists whose crime has been proven to have occurred in a court of law - should be castrated/jailed/executed.
But no woman has the right to hurt or kill any innocent person just because she was the victim of rape.
A woman aborting the child who is the product of a rape would be no different than her just shooting some random person walking down the street.
The government cannot force the woman to be a mother - but it can and should stop her from murdering her unborn innocent child.
In regard to the case of gender identity - I am unaware of anyone claiming that people are not free to feel whatever they want to feel - but it is only when the actions based on such feelings infringe on the rights of others - such as the right to receive a proper education at school or to compete in a fair competition or to privacy - that the government can step in.
The government should interfere when public educators become activists and start indoctrinating their students in their ideology - I mean they did in in regard to religious teachers and them teaching their faith to students.
The government should interfere when public facilities - such as restrooms and prisons - designed for only members of one of the biological sexes is invaded by members of the opposite biological sex.
I don't think government should interfere in sports - unless it is the Olympics - but all these women getting ousted by male competitors should refuse to compete until men are taken out of women's sports.
Let's note that the inalienable rights you cite here are for humans to set whatever laws they want for self-governance, and that means that humans assume a responsibility to be responsible for their laws and behavior within and for the benefit of a collective society. It is not about a feral community of wild humans who do whatever they want.
No one is claiming that "freedom" means people can do whatever they want - because that can and will infringe upon the freedoms of others.
You are just parroting leftist talking points.
The right wing wants all the freedom, but none of the responsibility for freedom.
It was the "right wing" that advocated for defunding the police, decriminalizing theft, decriminalizing public drug use, decriminalizing public defecation?
Who wants to give rapists only 5 years in prison - those on the right or those on the left?
Who wants to judge college admission and employment opportunities on merit - rather than sex or race?
Who claims that the individual is not responsible for their personal choices - but they can blame everything on history or a system of government?
You will notice - that on practically every issue - it is the right - not the left - who espouses personal responsibility and accountability.
The "social justice" collective Hive minds - who believe that everyone should do as directed, and no one is responsible for their actions - are on the left - not the right.
