Originally Posted by Derid
How is not being allowed to wander about unmasked and unvaccinated in a private establishment either an infraction of their personal freedom, or unreasonable?

Is the American Museum of Natural History a private establishment? I am asking, because I don't know. I suspect it is government-funded. Regardless, being denied access is infraction of personal freedom, the only question if it is justified.

It is unreasonable because benefits of these mandates could not be shown to exceed the costs they impose. We now know that neither vaccines nor cloth masks prevent spread of Omicron. So what possible justification of known to be ineffective measures could you have?

Can you demonstrate that a scenario where these people met the minimum level of compliance (cloth mask and 1-shot of J&J 12 months ago) is materially safer for other patrons than what transpired?

Originally Posted by Derid
It does not, it only requires that the establishment chooses to enforce said mandates in compliance with what they believe are their legal obligations. The reasons are immaterrial

Is it so? Mandate needs to be reasonable for establishment enforcing it to be reasonable. Otherwise "just following orders" applies.

[Linked Image]