• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Wondering about "anti-maskers".

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Question: Are most of Trump’s supporters “anti-maskers”, following his example?

If that’s true, it seems to me that this very-serious-threat May eliminate his base by November. They’ll mostly be dead.
 

Secret Chief

Veteran Member
If I was being forced to go naked, I probably wouldn't like that very much. But wearing a mask, during the pandemic, is just being courteous.
Does it have to be either/or?

B318E168-BBE8-4A62-9147-4B4E5E5D078A.jpeg
 

Secret Chief

Veteran Member
Question: Are most of Trump’s supporters “anti-maskers”, following his example?

If that’s true, it seems to me that this very-serious-threat May eliminate his base by November. They’ll mostly be dead.
I thought I'd read wearing a mask turns out to be patriotic? Or was that yesterday?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
You got to add explanation. Without the support, I don't know what to get from this.

If you oppose mandated masks because you see it as tyrannical and anti-freedom, then you must also oppose mandated clothing becasue by the same logic it's also tyrannical and anti-freedom.
Unless you believe exposed breasts pose a greater danger to society than spreading a potentiality deadly disease, that is.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
If you oppose mandated masks because you see it as tyrannical and anti-freedom, then you must also oppose mandated clothing becasue by the same logic it's also tyrannical and anti-freedom.
Unless you believe exposed breasts pose a greater danger to society than spreading a potentiality deadly disease, that is.

I guess this would apply to those who are anti-mask supporters?

From what I looked up, those are the reasons anti-mask supporters don't want to wear them is because of taking away their freedom, etc. It's sad but no use blaming other people over it.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
By logic, those who oppose mask mandates because they consider them tyrannical and anti-freedom would also oppose anti-nudity laws that mandate clothing for the same reason. However, being conservative this same group would likely consider public nudity offensive, as if bare breast posed greater threat to society than a potentially fatal disease.
Thoughts?
I think it's wrong-headed to call out anti-maskers for hypocrisy, because - IMO - they aren't actually being hypocritical.

For them to be hypocritical, they'd have to actually hold the positions they claim to hold. They aren't hypocrites; they're just dishonest.

AFAICT, their actions are entirely consistent with another guiding principle: that they should say whatever they need to in order to avoid having to be inconvenienced for the sake of other people they see as worthless.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The longer the thread, the more I forget who said what:

Hense the thread title.


What other people are getting blamed?

You've made arbitrary and contradictory assertions while skirting the point entirely.

You got to add explanation. Without the support, I don't know what to get from this.

I guess this would apply to those who are anti-mask supporters?

From what I looked up, those are the reasons anti-mask supporters don't want to wear them is because of taking away their freedom, etc. It's sad but no use blaming other people over it.

What did you mean by this:

If you oppose mandated masks because you see it as tyrannical and anti-freedom, then you must also oppose mandated clothing becasue by the same logic it's also tyrannical and anti-freedom.

Unless you believe exposed breasts pose a greater danger to society than spreading a potentiality deadly disease, that is.

How does this apply to what I said?
 
Top