I'm normally against prison labor, but I'll give Indonesia a pass here.

Beware the 13th amendment, for it legalized slavery as punishment for crime.

The united states could also do this.

It most certainly will if you creeps are in charge.

Prisons are already using slave labor, there is even a rodeo.

And I have no problem with people who broke the law by robbing raping or murdering having to do physical labor. Obviously, unlike you I don't support imprisoning those who simply disagree.

I am opposed to all slavery.

But you are ok with re education camps

The f**k?

"No one being forced at all."

Yeah they are.

https://www.insider.com/indonesia-forcing-anti-maskers-to-dig-covid-19-victims-graves-2020-9

1. Genetic fallacy: noted

2. Would you trust local news?

https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/09/10/gresik-residents-made-to-dig-graves-as-punishment-for-not-wearing-face-masks.html

They attack all news sources, but are especially triggered by CNN for some reason. They rant and rave about CNN, though it is a moderate left media.

It's a form of a genetic fallacy: It's attacking the origin of the claim rather than the claim itself.

Person A: Provides source x

Person B: BuT's ThAt'S bIaSeD!

It's a shallow deflection that ignores the content of the actual source.

Easier than learning to read I guess

Except the USA is already down to that standard.

Trump's America, am I right

Lol, here they are celebrating labor camps.

It's literally like community service though.

And aren't the Republicans in favor of prison labor and stuff like that?

I want to clarify that I'm normally against these things, but the punishment here just seems so fitting for anti-maskers that I support it for this specific instance.

Yes all labor camps are essentially community service. I don’t know about all republicans but I don’t have an issue with prisoners performing work. Up to now we don’t imprison people for political differences in this country. I believe the left will certainly implement that for anyone with a different thought, like these poor slobs.

Wearing a mask isn't a political issue. It's a public health issue.

Says you, no politician has the right to muzzle the populace. Nor technically the right to force shelter in place for any extended period. A business owner or venue owner may have the right to require customers to wear a mask but government has limited powers. I’m
Not surprised that socialists and Commies have no problem surrendering their rights to someone who wears a lab coat. The fact is government can inform and suggest, the rest is up to people and private sector to decide compliance.

Anyone who thinks wearing a mask is "surrendering your rights" will necessarily have to have a problem with clothing mandates too. After all, you're surrendering your rights by being forced to wear clothing in public amirite?

False equivalency, the tradition of covering the naughty bits has a tradition going back more than 2 millenia. Mask wearing only has that in Muslim society.

Mask wearing isn't a new concept. Surgeons wear it in hospitals, other countries most notably in east Asia regularly wore masks before the pandemic hit. And whether something is new concept is irrelevant to whether the implementation of that concept is unjust or not. The fundamental reasons why are the same. The right for you not to wear clothes in public is superseded by the right for others not to see you exposed to the elements per se. Similarly, the right for you not to wear a mask supersedes the right of others not to be exposed to a pandemic.

Well when I am in the operating room I will wear one.

This isn’t Asia, as much as you want it to be.

Well then i say well I am not sick so I am not exposing you to anything. So if you are afraid, you stay home.

There is no clothes law there is a law against indecent exposure in most places but society decides what is indecent. Since the mouth is not considered indecent there is no violation of the law.

You want to Criminalize people because they might be sick not because they are and are knowingly spreading It but because they might be. Your hysterical fear does not and should not rule others. We should ban the ownership
of pets because they could have fleas that Carry bubonic Plague. Or they
Might be bitten by a SARS bat.

"Well then i say well I am not sick so I am not exposing you to anything. So if you are afraid, you stay home."

You don't know that. There are many people who don't exhibit any symptoms, but still have covid in their body. Asymptomatic transmission remember?

"There is no clothes law there is a law against indecent exposure in most places but society decides what is indecent. Since the mouth is not considered indecent there is no violation of the law."

My argument isn't that wearing masks prevents indecent exposure, but the general reasoning between cloth mandates and mask mandates are the same, which is that the utility of implementing the mandate far outweighs the utility of not doing so. Mandating clothing means people aren't going to exposed, and they'll be protected from the weather. The benefits of wearing a mask FAR outweighs not wearing it. Would you rather decrease the prevalence of the pandemic by wearing a mask with the only downside being the minor inconvenience of wearing it, or would you want to dramatically increase the prevalence of the pandemic with the miniscule upside of not having to wear a mask?

"You want to Criminalize people because they might be sick not because they are and are knowingly spreading It but because they might be. Your hysterical fear does not and should not rule others. We should ban the ownership
of pets because they could have fleas that Carry bubonic Plague. Or they
Might be bitten by a SARS bat."

Except a lot of people with covid are asymptomatic.
https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/06/01/asymptomatic-patients

You're comparisons are disanalogous because the risk of contracting the plague in 2020 is so incredibly low. There's like a handful of cases in the world. The utility of letting people own pets far outweighs the utility of banning them because pets provide humans joy and comfort as well as saving lives. And you're acting like wearing a mask is some oppressive and tyrannical horror. It's not. As I said before, it's a minor inconvenience at best.

1. The consequences of not having the population wear a mask are far more deadly than the consequences of not searching people who go to a bank.

2.Read Jacobson vs. Massachusetts.

Asymptomatic spread may be possible but it is not the primary method as asymptomatic s don’t generally cough or sneeze. How do I know you are not a bank robber walking towards that bank. Should you be stopped and frisked because you could be one?

The question is not the level of inconvenience, it is the power of the government. I live in Los Angeles and I wear a mask when I cannot social distance. Otherwise I don’t. I respect business owners rights to require masks as well as employers. I don’t want the government sending people to work camps for not wearing one like you do. Joe Biden wants it required when you go outside
Whether you are around someone or not. That’s ridiculous and an overreach of government authority.