Some Parents Just Don't Care

 

It’s depressing  to know that several parents of parochial school students in Ponchatoula are doing their part to continually spread the COVID-19 virus and contribute to keeping our economy from opening up.  At approximately 7:00 AM Thursday there was a gathering of 20 plus female students and their parents in a neighbor’s yard near the park hugging and socializing without masks. Additionally, their parents were gleefully taking pictures of these girls hugging and posing.  I assume it was some type of back to school celebration because the girls donned their school uniforms. 

It is apparent from this foolish gathering that these parents are confident in their assumption that kids are, as our Commander-in Chief has recently falsely stated, nearly immune from COVID-19. 

As is so often the case with the COVID-19 pandemic, these parents are banking on THEIR assumptions about this virus being correct; ignoring the possible downsides if they are wrong.  If they had practiced protective measures, the only downside would have been not holding the gathering at all.  I’m sure this would not have been some devastating event in their child’s life that would have seriously impacted his/her mental health. 

On the other hand, by holding the event, and assuming it’s safe, the possible downsides to that, if they are wrong, are they have now spawned new carriers of COVID-19 with the additional benefit of their child becoming ill and missing school. 

Fortunately, data suggests that the kids will most likely be asymptomatic and just gleefully go through their daily lives spreading the virus to others. 

This event should also serve as a model for the Tangipahoa School District in their draconian attempts to protect their students from COVID-19.   Apparently they are just wasting their time implementing protective measures such as disinfecting surfaces, social distancing, mask wearing, and offering optional virtual learning, because the bottom line is there may be a whole bunch of parents like those participating in Thursday’s social gathering that couldn’t care less about the safety of their children and others when it involves COVID-19.  So sad!

 

Reply to Local Commentary Regarding Anti-Masking

It’s obvious from Glenda Sharkey’s bizarre commentary entitled “Taking away our rights” that she fails to understand what it means to be a member of a society.

According to the Cambridge dictionary, ‘society’ is defined as the set of rules that a group of individuals lives by known as ‘the social contract.’   In other words, people must play a part in agreeing to abide by certain rules that will benefit the majority of the group members.

Philosopher Thomas Hobbes theorizes that without a society, “Man's natural state would be to preserve only oneself; a man without society would steal another family's food, seduce other men's wives and kill anyone who got in his way.  Of course, the same man would be in constant danger of those things happening to him, his wife and his children. What people needed, therefore, was a society, which would provide protection by subjecting everyone to a set of rules (social contract).” 

The ‘social contract’ not only involves people agreeing to abide by certain rules, but also choosing a leader who may make decisions which benefit the group as a whole.

And therein is where the flaw exists in Ms. Sharkey’s thinking about protecting one’s ‘self-rights’ in resisting the state mask mandate.  It turns into a perfect example of pure selfishness, for she wants to decide, in isolation, what rules she desires to follow to benefit only her.   And if she doesn’t like the rule, she categorizes it as an infringement on her ‘self-rights’; again a rather self-centered point of view showing little regard to the other members of the society of which she has chosen to be a member.

She raises the issue of mandated seat belt wearing while riding in a car as a possible early example of impinging on one’s ‘self-rights’.  Contrary to popular belief, wearing a seat belt not only protects her but also the other societal members riding in her vehicle in the event of an accident.  Its requirement protects her body from becoming a dangerous projectile thrown into another person riding in the car.  It’s in place to protect her and other members of Ms. Sharkey’s society.

Ms. Sharkey, like so many others who have made mask wearing a politicized ‘self-rights’ issue, fails to comprehend that she should wear a mask to help protect others in society from being infected by her.   Ms. Sharkey has no way of knowing whether or not she is an asymptomatic carrier of COVID-19.  Mask wearing should be done out of a cooperative effort to function as a member of the society from which Ms. Sharkey continually benefits.  It is not an issue about ‘self-rights.’

Additionally, as far as her statement is concerned, that wearing a mask might be a health risk by trapping exhaled carbon dioxide and causing one to breathe in more CO2, this is categorically false. The WHO listed this as one of the common myths being circulated on social media and states scientific data which indicate that the prolonged use of surgical masks doesn't lead to CO2 intoxication or a lack of oxygen.   I don’t find evidence of any doctors passing out during surgeries.

I hope Ms. Sharkey realizes that if she strictly adhered to her beliefs about societal cooperation (rules) and its infringement on her ‘self-rights’, she would have no alternative but to come to the finale conclusion that she really has very few ‘self-rights.’

If she truly believes that, and that mandating a mask to protect other societal members from prolonged hospitalization and possible death is an infringement on, or a taking away of her ‘self-rights’, I suggest she take up residence in China, for then she will truly understand what taking away “self rights’ really means.