I agree you shouldn't be able to walk into a business while you are known to be sick EVEN WITH A MASK. But that's not the rules that were made.
An ideal scenario would be to test everyone regularly, contact trace every sick person and contain but that is not legal or feasible on a large scale.
Curbside pickup with a mask with no chazakah of health has a possibility of infecting someone. Not actively hurting like smoking indoors...
There's no chazaka of getting lung cancer just because you were once in a bar where someone smoked, either.
Laws are made to protect the masses by reducing their risk. Masks reduce risk. Keeping businesses with a track record of spreading infection open, like bars and clubs, increases risk. Do I have to walk into a bar? No. But if the state tells me I can keep the bar I own open, my landlord and distributors are going to want their money, so I'll be pressured to open to avoid financial ruin. My opening forces my employees to choose between taking risk or being out of a job. It also encourages those who may not be aware of the risks to step inside, exposing them to an avoidable higher-risk situation. Yes, they are there by their own free will, which is their right, but how many of the people in my bar are going to work the next day? How many have essential public facing jobs, maybe some cashiers, a delivery driver, a public transit employee or two? How many have jobs in other places of high-risk spread, like another bar or a meat packing plant?
If you doubt my little example, it's not fiction. This has been playing out in GA, FL, TX, and AZ for the last 6 weeks. Now where do we draw the line on the government's role in reducing spread and keeping people safe?
