>>11863080 pb
Mass mask-wearing is not effective in stopping the spread of RONA. Yet that is the proffered justification for mandates and other forms of coercion to force people to wear masks in public and in workplaces. Efficacy is the first problem.
What follows from this is that mask-wearing in public has become a political expression of a political sentiment. Compelled speach is unlawful both in public spaces and in the general workplace. The dogmatic belief in the protective powers of a face covering is mystical, superstitious, or otherwise quasi-religious. Coercive measures to force onto people religious or religious-like practices is unlawful whether the government mandates or the employer mandates.
A non-governmental organization such as a business that makes service to customers or employment to employees contingent upon compelled political speach or compelled religious-type practices is unlawful in our constitutional order.
Further, mask-wearing does harm to well-being both of the individual and of the community in various ways including loss of normal freedom, harm to physical health, harm to psychological and social well-being. For all or any one of these reasons no government has the authority to mandate mass mask-wearing - and may not lawfully coerce non-governmental entities to in turn coerce customers and employees.
The balancing of rights can not mean that deteriorating the right to protection of public health is balanced against infringement of individual and group freedoms and liberties. Two negatives does not balance of rights that, objectively, are not in conflict. The government has proposed to set itself in conflict with both public health rights and individual rights.
The excuse offered for these restrictive measures is supposedly stopping the spread of a virus based on a flawed system of surveilling public health via mass PCR testing of healthy people. This is not the purpose of such tests nor is it a reliable measure of infectivity and transmission. This soft foundation for the government's restrictions is unsound and the rest of the rationale collapses with its failure on a scientific basis.
JUSTIFICATION BASED ON POLITICAL SENTIMENT AND PROMOTION OF THAT SENTIMENT IS INSUFFICIENT.
The people have a government, not the other way around.