Coronavirus II

[Alpo]

I’m not arguing what the established legal thinking believes what is “legal” only what it should be.

Unfortunately, the world is not full of Unicorns.

Wait.....

[/IMG]

 

[jamil]

Calling it "the wuhan virus" accomplishes at least two negative things:

1. It makes the conversation less precise.
2. It disparages a group of victims as though Covid-19 was their fault.

I can't come up with any positive.

Yeah, it's a small thing. But why try to be abrasive about stuff like this? Conservatives are regularly labeled as racists; why give more ammo to the opposition for nothing gained?

As fast as this thread goes, we’re probably several pages past this, and probably several people have replied to this. But Imma say it anyway. This line of reasoning isn’t well thought out. I wish people would just drop it, because it’s kinda silly. No one’s calling it the “asian people virus”. Or even the Chinese people virus. That would be closer to something you might call racist, and even then it depends on what they’re saying. Calling it the Wuhan virus isn’t saying anything about race. Nothing. Race is not reasonably even reasonably inferred. So why bother inferring it when it’s not implied? I’ll cite two reasons:

1) people who don’t like the people who tend to say it, like to believe the most uncharitable things about those people.

2) it was reported on the news that Trump calls it the Wuhan virus because he’s a racist—can’t be any other reason.

Personally, I don’t generally call it the Wuhan virus, because that’s not the name the scientists gave it. If they named it the Wuhan virus I’d have zero problems calling it that. Naming it after ground zero is not racist, so please people, stop being so PC. It’s really unnecessary to bunch one’s panties over that. The only thing I would infer about the people who call it “Wuhan Virus” is that they want to note that this is where it originated.


No one’s saying that the blame for a virus is on an entire race. We shouldn’t have to be concerned that it causes some people to think conservatives are racist. Those people are idiots.

 

[BugI02]

Sadly, the people that are cheering this on are so afraid of getting sick they don’t care.

People tend to focus more on the danger right in front of them than the more abstract and esoteric dangers. That's how we wound up where we are

 

[Alpo]

You are correct, Jamil.

We are several pages past this.

 

[nonobaddog]

I’m not arguing what the established legal thinking believes what is “legal” only what it should be.

The laws in Indiana can't be that bad, you don't have a Pacific coast line.

 

[BugI02]

I continue to believe that this lack of freedom (self-imposed, for the most part) will remind people of how important freedom is (along with liberty). Once we get through this, people will look for all sorts of reasons to exercise their freedoms.

And I also think they will look suspiciously at any efforts to put more teeth in the pre-existing public health and safety laws. The existing laws seem to be sufficient, so I'm not sure what the impetus would be to take on more power.

We'll see, but I think those efforts would be resisted.

What do all men with power want? More power.

*.*

 

[Trigger Time]

Unfortunately, the world is not full of Unicorns.

Wait.....

[/IMG]

Bahahahahahahahahaha

 

[chipbennett]

I'm about as far from an atheist as one can be....and I agree that it is both legal and prudent for churches not to gather at this time.

I wholeheartedly agree with the prudence; I don't agree with the legality - in particular, if regularly meeting together is part of religious adherence is a sincerely held religious belief, then the state prohibiting said regular meeting together compels a violation of conscience for the one who sincerely holds such a religious belief.

Even Federal RFRA has constrained less egregious state action - on the basis that far less-mainstream religious beliefs must be accommodated - than prohibiting religious gatherings.

 

[Dead Duck]

So now the Christians are being persecuted again?
I'm pretty sure the problem isn't about spreading the Word.






God Delivers!
Just give Him a call.

 

[chipbennett]

It is. Cancel gatherings and lead the flock or encourage gatherings and be arrested.

Replace "USA" with "CCP", and consider how your ultimatum sounds.

 

[BugI02]

I thought the 19 referred to year of discovery. If so it could be subject to a 2000 in 2100.

Yes, just like when the last nearby supernova exploded it was named SN1987A. The next one, even if it is Betelgeuse, will be SN20XX or SN21XX plus a letter suffix. The pattern proceeds from the general to the specific

In todays nomenclature, a person died of CoVid 02, caused by SARS CoV 1. SARS just became popular as a designator when it was unique as was MERS but the terms lack specificity

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I wholeheartedly agree with the prudence; I don't agree with the legality - in particular, if regularly meeting together is part of religious adherence is a sincerely held religious belief, then the state prohibiting said regular meeting together compels a violation of conscience for the one who sincerely holds such a religious belief.

Even Federal RFRA has constrained less egregious state action - on the basis that far less-mainstream religious beliefs must be accommodated - than prohibiting religious gatherings.

Yeah but when people are sufficiently afraid and panicked, none of those “niceties” matters anymore.

 

[Route 45]

I don’t have any “safe zones” I will say this though that my previous post that started this was pretty much a personal shot that I admit was out of line. I should not have went there and sidetracked the discussion which was certainly relevant. For that I apologize to R45.

No worries. It's the internet.

Belief or non-belief aside, I think it's a more interesting topic than "bUt iT'S nOt cAllEd WuHaN viRuS!"

Here is the Indiana specific story:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/loc...ch-leaders-cited-for-holding-service/2251412/

 

[BugI02]

You must be pretty new to the internet to think that might happen.

The only bleeding hearts I'm likely to approve of are in game that I have shot. YMMV

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Trump just announced a halt to funding the WHO

Wow!

https://twitter.com/RepGosar/status/1247646626786795522

 

[BugI02]

And that's why you have your own special safe zone called the "religious discussion" thread. Perhaps you need to stay inside the chalk circle.

Well, at least you didn't take the gloves off and say pentagram, but -10 religious tolerence points

 

[Dead Duck]

Trump just announced a halt to funding the WHO

Wow!

Who did Trump halt funding to?

 

[Sigblitz]

Exactly

 

[Alpo]

Well, at least you didn't take the gloves off and say pentagram, but -10 religious tolerence points

Judge not and ye shall not be judged, amigo.

Buttinski.

 

[Route 45]

Who did Trump halt funding to?

Yes.