Mr. Anonymous objects to our protesting compulsory muzzles on medical grounds for two reasons: the dishonesty when healthy people claim they are “medically exempt,” and the lack of principle in that excuse. But, he adds, 

[o]n the one hand, liars & criminals threatening force aren’t owed any truth whatsoever.

I’m not sure we find Scriptural support for this idea. I can think of examples that seemingly endorse it; e.g., the Hebrew midwives averred their clients delivered babies faster than they themselves could arrive to kill the infants, when in actuality the midwives refused to murder—and God “was kind” to them. But the Bible also emphasizes the primacy of truth at all times. I have long wondered about this paradox and welcome your thoughts on it.

Mr. A continues:

But on the other hand, making … use of their other rules – citing an unspecified health issue/disability & then keeping that private with the ADA cite – is still “compliance.” …

What do these lawyer tactic types do if/when these loops are hooked (velcro) shut?

Not wearing masks isn’t the point. Why not, is the point. And none of these wriggles makes that point.

I agree with both criticisms—provided that we are indeed dishonest when we cite the “medical exemption.” But are we? Studies abound showing the harm masks wreak on those who wear them. I for one enjoy breathing, and I don’t want anything as silly as politics or hysteria interfering with that “medical” process. 

However, Mr. A’s tactical grievance is spot-on.  Ideally, we’d be able to say, “Not gonna wear one, no-how, because forcing me to do so is dictatorship.” And perhaps we’ll eventually arrive at that halcyon hour. But for now, with most of the population capitulating to illegal and unenforceable mandates, and many of them doing so not only voluntarily but eagerly, we must choose our strategy wisely, as underdogs always do. “Medical exemption” works, so I’m sticking with it. 

But Mr. A doesn’t speak without experience:

I went to the grocer. Was met at the door, told a mask was mandatory. I said “no.” “May I ask why?” she asked. “Because it is absurd,” I said. Then I spoke of the size of aerosol droplets – 2.5 microns, or less. Then of the size of virions in those droplets – nanometers (optical microscopes can’t resolve them, it takes an electron microscope & staining). Told her things that small will & do go right thru masks. She said the governor said…& I said “I don’t work for the governor.”… 

On in I went. I shopped. At the register the black, Rasta-type guy asked if I wanted to buy a mask. “No.” He was wearing a plastic sneeze-shield (I call them), & behind that a scarf wrapped around his face. But he was sympathetic. Warned me that I was a shark, surrounded by guppies (his words). Told me Marcus Garvey said “never riot where you live because first comes the law, then the national guard, then the marines.”

 And he’s right, about the sequence of escalation. No point in standing on, or arguing, principle with unprincipled cops, other cogs, etc. But invoking health issues & the ADA isn’t principled, either. Lie-invoking those is doubly unprincipled. Being amongst the masked without a mask because of this or that exemption accomplishes absolutely nothing.

Again, I disagree. Walking about with a naked face may vastly encourage your fellow shoppers, none of whom will know that you pled “medical exemption.” Perhaps I’m naive, but I doubt your words make it past the guy at the door whose job it is to intimidate guests into muzzling themselves; he probably isn’t telling his manager each night, “Yeah, 23 medical exemptions and 18 wackadoos wouldn’t tell me why they won’t mask up.”

We each fight in our own way. Those of you who relish confrontation may want to try Mr. A’s method. Others are more comfortable flaunting a naked face without arguing the whys and wherefores.

The Best of Becky Akers