If this had happened to my late son, I would have had to have been physically restrained, and then I would have brought suit against everyone involved. This is what happens when humanity and common sense go out the window to enforce an idiotic policy.
Thought For the Day
- Donald R. McClarey
Donald R. McClarey
Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three, one in Heaven, and happily married for 43 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.
That’s the Spirit!
Shareholders having pucker-factor 9 after this story circulated.
I’m with you Don. I don’t think I would of been able to restrain myself. I know that I would of lashed out on an representative. Verbally and possibly physically.
Words fail – what’s wrong with people? They need to be named and humiliated like they did to that innocent little boy.
John K got to fly without one.
.
These mask mandates are lawyer-driven and probably will not end until someone wins a substantial amount of money.
.
There is a great disparity between the world views of Christians and Pagans.
Christians believe we come from God, are answerable to God, depend upon God (regardless of personal belief), are under God’s Law and return to God one day to give account for what we have done (regardless of belief).
Pagans believe we evolve from nothing, are answerable to nothing, the only law is power of one over another, human will prevails over other human will which determines evolutionary outcomes, and we give account to no one and no thing ever. Nature is all that matters. “Only the strong survive”, “Only the strong should survive” – these are Nature’s impersonal laws and they are the highest good (to Pagans, whether they admit or not).
Christians value life for its own sake, all life, in an hierarchy of value as it pertains to God’s Creation hierarchy in His image and from His mind.
Pagans value life only for its utility on behalf of their “selfs” in their personal quest for dominance (alongside all others in similar quests for dominance) in the evolutionary economy on behalf of “Nature” which approves only of strong over weak.
In reality Pagans are fooling themselves, because what they call impersonal evolutionary “science” is merely the economy of hell under its Lord Satan. And there is no room there for the weak, defective, unproductive, “useless”.
If you wish to be served by the less powerful, hell is the place for you.
If you wish to serve God and also serve Man in all of their variety on behalf of the God you love for no other productive reason than love – then heaven is the place for you.
Well done, Aqua.
Frank + 1
The youngster’s not in any danger at his age, the accumulation of studies on the utility of masks isn’t showing them to be of cardinal importance, and there is some uncertainty as to whether a youngster his age can spread the virus even if they’re carrying it. One thing this episode in our history has shown us is that people in management defer to the compliance people and the compliance people are idiots. And it’s not as if stewardesses as a class of people are all that diligent; they could have looked the other way.
There is indeed some uncertainty as to whether (or the extent to which) a youngster his age can spread the virus if he is carrying it, but that uncertainty should cut in favor of safety for third parties. I have no problem believing that the airline and flight attendant might have handled this imperfectly — even poorly — but the protocols are reasonable and worthy of general enforcement. I’m open to exceptions and alternative protocols, but simply suggesting that third parties must bear the risk of spread from children at least if they are autistic does not seem reasonable to me.
If uncertainty should cut in favor of protecting third parties, we would’ve listened to the vast amounts of evidence going back a century that excessive masking causes bacterial pneumonia, and cloth masks do not prevent spread. The false security of a kerchief is not worth demanding others risk a lung infection.
Going off of the pattern of mandatory masking followed a month or so later by higher numbers of infections, they may actually increase COVID infection rates. It is possible that mandatory masking causes a behavior change, as was suggested by the sudden drop in soap consumption in stores that put in masking rules, even when their number of customers went up.
Risk of spread!! ?? This is not the killer plague! ! People may be exposed and never contract it. We don’t know that the boy had any symptoms at all! More than 99% of the people who actually contract it do not suffer death. The scare news makes people act like frightened geese! Common sense!
An autistic child can often be subject to meltdowns Mike, especially when in new situations like being on an airplane. Trying to mask a four year old autistic child would likely trigger such a meltdown.
As to the larger issue, I have my doubts about the efficacy of masks in any case, certainly the ones most people are wearing. If they were truly a good idea, the amount of coercion currently being used to enforce mask mandates would likely be unnecessary. Such infringement on personal liberty, at least in a purportedly free society, should be undertaken, in my opinion, only in the gravest situation.
Precautionary principles arguments are always bankrupt because there are always uncertain risks for either doing something or not doing something. Ex. if you don’t wear a mask you might risk spreading a disease, but if you wear a mask you might risk incubating a disease on the mask or restricting your breathing. If you don’t take the vaccine you might get sick but as all vaccines have potential side effects and these vaccines are rushed of a completely new type there are risks for taking the vaccine as well.
If you can definitely say that one risk is certain and the other is not then you can make an informed decision. But people who use the precautionary principle don’t do that, because they can’t. There’s no way that you can prove that if this four year old boy had been allowed on the plane without a mask that anyone would have come to harm. It all comes down to maybes and speculations.
Basically what this means is that the argument is simply “you must take these steps because you must take them.” The talk of risks are a dodge because any possibility of risks or trade offs in using those methods are ignored.
Remember that picture the next time you hear Pelosi’s unctuous “for the children”.
There is indeed some uncertainty as to whether (or the extent to which) a youngster his age can spread the virus if he is carrying it, but that uncertainty should cut in favor of safety for third parties.
The masks aren’t that effective, the kid’s not symptomatic, it’s uncertain that he could infect anyone else even if he carried the virus, and the air in the cabin is subject to purification. The risk to any ‘third party’ is diddly / squat. If you’re that concerned about trivial risks, stay home.
(T)hat uncertainty should cut in favor of safety for third parties…
.
Uh, no.
.
The “third parties” in question should not be exposing themselves. Stay home.
.
I don’t believe in (government mandated) masks, lockdowns, social distancing, or mandatory vaccines. I am in better shape than the average 50 year old. I down Omega 3, Zinc, Cal/Mag/D3 and apples like candy, but I am on an ACE inhibator. You could NOT pay me to get on a plane. My husband and I worked at a fundraiser for our parish today, and I rejected two restaurants on the way home because the parking lots where “too full”–mind you, we are only at 50% capacity in Michigan. I avoid the big grocery stores and Wal-mart.
.
I will not travel out of State at this time. (I wish Schuette was Governor and that Whitmer!!)
.
If you are at risk, you stay home. Stay out of airplanes, restaurants, grocery/department stores. Stay away from sporting events, Youth Groups, Spring Break, and college dormatories. Use Instacart and/or Curbside. Wash your hands. Eat apples. Masks are pure virtue signalling and theatre. There is no proof masks as we use them work. A full-on resprator/gas mask possibly works, but not the stuff we buy at Walgreens or CVS. (And the disposable masks are contributing to environmental degradation.)
.
Do not ask those not at risk to suspend their lives and to Social Distance/wear a mask. Especially not little children. In all honesty, “they” will not do a good job of keeping you safe, so you must do it for yourself. Hey, it bites, but “Realville” is not a fun place.
You know during the period when masks were mandatory in Australia it only applied to children above the age of 12. Under 12 were optional. The rules in one country are not the same in another. For the exact same virus! They chop and change rules with no basis. There is no way you can enforce masks on children, let alone an autistic child who is constantly sensitive to changes in the environment around them. The stewardess are morons.
Before there were widespread mandates each individual jurisdiction chose where to draw the line for kids. Some chose 12, some 8 some 5. Generally the tendency was for the age to drop as mandates were made from higher authorities so now the age limit skews low. I’ve most commonly seen 5 and 2, though no one seems to have went under 2 for the very good reason that masks serve as a choking hazard for young children.
Which gets us to the “uncertainty” business. There are certainly going to be children who are less able to handle masks even at ages above 2. An autistic child could easily fall into this category, even if the only risk is far more fiddling with the mask (and thus increased chance of getting germs on it) and not outright choking through chewing on or swallowing the mask.
But there’s gotta be a chance that a child in that age range could choke on the mask or get infected by a nasty disease due to improper usage, right? So shouldn’t we err on the side of protecting children?
Except for some crazy reason it never works like that. Wild speculations is perfectly fine for defending mandates, but never for questioning them. Erring on the side of uncertainty is always a way to dodge actually finding information that supports a policy.
So true. The policy should be based on the science. So if the science is BS, then the policy is certainly BS.
The following article is very good.
Children are just not carriers of Covid.
.
My personal thought is that anyone at risk of illness stay away from any kind of institution if at all possible, and that includes schools. Influenza is still out there–an extended- family member tested positive twice this past season. She works with children in an environment where masks are mandatory.
The article.
.
https://www.aier.org/article/why-are-we-vaccinating-children-against-covid-19/
https://www.campusreform.org/article?id=17075
In case you were wondering about the purpose of COVID mandates, the University of Florida’s dean of students let the cat out of the bag.
“In case you were wondering about the purpose of COVID mandates, the University of Florida’s dean of students let the cat out of the bag.”
Indeed. Art, in addition to your well-founded advice that the teachers’ colleges should all be shut down, it’s starting to look to me as if the same should happen to darned near every state-run college and university, and not a few of the private ones, as well. The whole idea of “higher education” has, in most places, become nothing but an overpriced leftist indoctrination exercise that benefits no one in terms of actual preparation for a productive life.