Thoughts Regarding the Common Arguments Against COVID-19 Regulations

When it comes to COVID-19, the current global pandemic, the need to put regulations in place that legally restrict certain activities probably makes sense to the average person, seeing as the virus is contagious and more deadly than other viruses. For instance, in spite of having similarities with the flu in terms of symptoms, the COVID-19 death rate has been shown to be around 5 times higher. Add to that the fact that people who have COVID-19 but are not conscious of the fact that they have it due to having mild or not symptoms, it is still possible to spread it to others. As such, certain areas have rightly determined that it is necessary to place some restrictions on what people are allowed to do, until the virus is under control. For example, Minnesota currently mandates that people entering buildings with multiple people to cover their nose and mouth with a masks, and also mandates that precautions be taken when in bars and restaurants, such as being a certain amount of feet apart. As someone who has been trying to take as many precautions as I can and abide by all the mandates, it bothers me to hear tons of people complain about the restrictions being a form of government overreach, even going so far as to defy whatever regulations are in places. There are 5 particularly common arguments against the regulations I hear that people make, each of which I have addressed below and explained why they are not valid arguments.

"Having to wear masks makes me breathe in carbon dioxide, which will make me sick."

That is untrue for healthy people. Health care providers have long worn masks for lengthy amounts of time without any widespread problems. There is no question that wearing a mask is generally not that comfortable though, so limiting your talking while in a mask so that you can breathe more comfortably is recommended.

"Having to wear masks, stay home, socially distance, etc. violates my right to let God protect me through natural means."

There are a couple notable problems with this line of reasoning. For starters, if a person thinks it is wrong to use masks for protection against the virus because of it preventing them from letting God heal them , what would they have to say about taking other precautions against other things that are unsafe? For example, this argument could be made to say that it is wrong to fight back when someone is physically assaulting you, which would probably even being untrue to even the person making this argument. Secondly, given the contagiousness of the virus, so long you insist on being around others, it is a choice that affects others and not just you. That makes it so that it is beyond just being a personal choice, and we do not generally have the freedom to make personal choices that we know will likely impact others in a negative way.

"Having to wear masks violates my right to bodily autonomy."

Being required to wear a mask is not really any more of a violation of bodily autonomy than being required to wear clothes in general. If you are in public or on private property that is not your own, whoever owns and/or runs that property ultimately has the authority to tell you that you cannot be on it if you do not follow the dress code they have put in place.

"Shutting down or limiting what businesses are able to do hurts the economy."

This may true statement, but it fails to acknowledge that keeping businesses open at full capacity would also likely hurt the economy in the sense that there would be more hospitalizations and deaths. Since the virus is contagious and can make someone have to be in the hospital and possibly pass away, that would obviously increase the need for hospitalization and the amount of deaths. I have heard some make the argument that shutdowns and limitations on business will increase death to in that they will lead people into depression such that they commit suicide, but still, suicide is not contagious and is something that people can generally control, unlike COVID-19.

"Domestic violence will increase, since COVID-19 restriction inevitably make it it so that people have to stay home more."

This statement may indeed be true as well. However, as is the case with the previous mentioned argument, this argument is talking about something that is not contagious, and can technically be controlled. Whether or not a person commits domestic violence is their choice and that choice does not spread to others like a virus does.

So what do you think? Do any of these arguments have validity? My conclusion is that most of them make sense at face value, but do not truly have much validity when I analyze them more carefully.