“Stay home, save lives.” This edict has become the vogue, yet the proposition arises somewhat backwards. While at home, what is the position; amid those one lives with; perhaps those one claims to care most about? To be consistent there should be no intimacy between man and wife, unwed couples living together, et cetera. If we take precautions with strangers, shouldn’t we take precautions with family and loved ones?
We are familiar with the signs, ‘No Mask, No Service.’ However, people set aside the face covering in private; in the company of family, roommates and so forth; the same cover deemed critical in public. What can we say about such behavior? Only it is wholly illogical. This is the zeitgeist of the times regarding thinking of mature people in relation to this substance.
Fresh signs with the words, ‘No Vaccination, No Service’ are imminent; face coverings serving as a precursor to vaccinations. In the main, people only at ease with others who submit to the vaccination agenda.
Estimates show one in five will decline to join the herd. The reasons vary from religious posture, potential allergic reactions, concerns over reports of serious side effects, to outright distrust of pharmaceutical companies. There is much debate within government and business institutions over these issues amid budding public dissention. It is safe to conclude that the majority opinion favors mandatory inoculations. The United States as a majority rules society lends plausibility to prospective national demonstrations. The ultimate speculation is what to do about dissenters who may suddenly find themselves disenfranchised?
Anon's Record 