But there's the question of what must be done to contain the plague. If public officials are unwilling to live by the rules they demand everyone else follow, then they clearly don't believe that obedience to those rules is necessary. And if they don't believe their own rhetoric, why should we?
I'm sure by now everyone's heard about the Supreme Court's ruling on New York's restrictions on church attendance. Sean Trend points out that the ruling isn't as new or expansive as some (on both sides) have said. Check out the column for more details, but this is the nub:
As others have pointed out, houses of worship have been the locus of multiple superspreading events, although, the court notes, not with Catholic congregations in New York City. But what the court is saying at this point is emphatically not that public health officials must overlook this danger in churches. Instead, the court essentially says, because of the First Amendment concerns, churches are essential businesses. Therefore, to be a neutral law the state much treat churches in the same way as were other essential businesses, especially when other essential businesses that are allowed to set their own occupancy rates have been the sites of COVID outbreaks.
And in other news, the Resistance continues to build:
Beverly Hills City Council Votes to Oppose LA County's Outdoor Dining Ban
Colorado Merchants Defy COVID-Closure Order
Edited to add: For those that didn't bother to look, here's the chart of the percentages by age of the total death rate from February to September:
@Doug64 , inconsistency and hypocrisy are all-too-human traits. None of us likes to follow rules, or rulers, because we have been disobedient since the Fall. Even the ones who make the rules-no matter how good and necessary those rules may be-still break them themselves.
It takes courage and leadership by example to help people do what is right, whether it's a parent with their children or a political leader in office.
Even if this COVID-19 virus turned out to be an order of magnitude or more of being less dangerous than the media and politicians suggest (and they do both have perverse incentives to exaggerate any emergency situation), it would still be important to follow their legal directives. Masking for example is a slight inconvenience (and probably only helps most people as a form of variolation, but still better than nothing) but beyond all earthly considerations such obedience is in fact godly in my opinion. Same with lock downs if necessary.
If we were in a war for the existential survival of our country, would people be as rebellious in following the leadership of the nation, for the nation's survival? I wonder.
But man is a fickle and disreputable creature and perhaps, like a chess-player, is interested in the process of attaining his goal rather than the goal itself.