1hundredsixty8

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

• Preamble to the United States Constitution

The meaning of “general welfare” is generally construed as the concern of the government for the health, peace, morality, and safety of its citizens. State constitutions contain similar clauses. In simple terms, legal interpretations of the Constitution regard Article 1, Section 8, as giving Congress the power to appropriate and spend funds to provide for the general welfare. The power to legislate specific laws is mostly left to the states per the Tenth Amendment (“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”)

Ensuring public health has been accepted as a legitimate necessity for the general welfare. During the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, many US cities mandated now-familiar practices: mandatory mask-wearing, social distancing, quarantine, and the banning of large gatherings. Just as today, there were disputes among some in the science and medical communities about the efficacy of such measures. There were also instances of resistance exemplified by groups such as The Anti-Mask League of San Francisco. 

History, Mark Twain is reported to have said, doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. There is an uncanny parallel between the 1918 flu and current pandemic even down to the kerfuffle over the wearing of masks to help inhibit the spread of the virus. The medical professionals- the researchers, scientists, and epidemiologists- emphasize that basic measures can slow the spread of the virus. Wearing a mask is one of these, but it’s been made into a contentious issue in the service of certain political agendas. An obnoxious minority has resisted state and local government public health mandates, including the wearing of masks. Some claim that such mandates infringe upon their constitutional rights, their “liberty”. 

I assume these persons have not read the Constitution. If so, they skipped over the Preamble on their way to bask in the glory that is the 2nd Amendment. In their selective understanding of our political system, they fail to acknowledge that with liberty comes responsibility.

That brings us back to public health. In willfully flaunting a mandate intended to protect the general welfare, anti-maskers are a potential threat to the population. In this light, they are terrorists. From the FBI website:

Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.

The anti-maskers definitely have ideological goals. Disobeying the law is a criminal act. And the spreading of a virus is a violent act, a form of biological warfare. Maybe it’s time the Feds sent in some camo-clad officers with no identifying insignias to round up these terrorists.