5 ms·
Let people worship as they choose. Adults have the right to choose their own risk.
by exabrial 6y ago
Let people worship as they choose. Adults have the right to choose their own risk.
- kanox 6y agoNo they don't.
- diffeomorphism 6y agoI don't care about their risk, but they don't have a right to put everyone else at risk. Analogy: If you play with fire and get burned, that is up to you. If you play with fire and burn your neighbor's house down...
- exabrial 6y agoHow are they going to expose you to a risk? Are they entering your home?
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoI'm pretty sure they're going to enter a store...
- exabrial 6y ago_so don't enter a store_
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoI shouldn't enter a store because they're being irresponsible? That seems like putting the burden where it does not belong. Larger scale: Nobody else should enter a store, because these people should be able to do their thing without "putting anyone else at risk"? That's absurd. They are putting other people at risk, and everyone else shouldn't have to go ridiculously far out of their way to avoid the risk. [Edit: Oh, yeah. What if I work at the store? At that point, "don't enter the store" is... somewhat lacking as usable advice.]
- exabrial 6y agoSo we've established nobody is entering your home, and nobody is making you enter a store. So there's zero risk for transmission. Now you say what about the workers? Great! What percentage of stores aren't doing curbside delivery right now?
- jejeri8d8d 6y agoWhat if I choose to worship by raping your kids?
- aaron695 6y ago> Let people worship as they choose. Adults have the right to choose their own risk. This is inconsistent. Either the risk is on them, in which case it doesn't just apply to religion, it should be anything. Or you think it has risk to the community, but religion should get preferential treatment.
- everybodyknows 6y agoAfter they leave the drum circle, they transfer the health risk to all the store clerks and medical personnel they approach. If they end up in the hospital, they transfer the financial burden to the insurance, hospital, and public aid systems, at a rate of however many thousands of dollars per day. They have no right to do this to the rest of us.
- ta17711771 6y agoI agree with you. As a human rights advocate, though, curious: where is the line, in everyone's mind? Can we use the law on people who don't wash their hands after they use the restroom? Etc
- goldenManatee 6y agoYour response is to do nothing because of an extreme edge case?
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoA law that everyone has to wash their hands after using the restroom seems less severe, to me, than a law that nobody's allowed to gather in public.
- comex 6y agoI agree in principle. That said, a law about washing hands would be impossible to actually enforce without some kind of highly intrusive surveillance, which itself would be a severe downside. But a law that wasn’t actively enforced and only existed so posters could say “wash your hands - it’s the law!” would be… fine, IMO… though I doubt it would produce much if any actual increase in handwashing.
- mrfusion 6y agoWe’ve never thought that way about flu’s.
- valuearb 6y agoWorship what?
- elisbce 6y agoYou have the right to determine your own fate. You can blow yourself up at home. Fine. Nobody cares. You don't have the right to come out and put everyone else at risk, esp. when it comes to a highly-infectious and potentially deadly disease.