ALPB Forum Online

ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: J. Thomas Shelley on November 23, 2021, 04:19:59 PM

Title: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: J. Thomas Shelley on November 23, 2021, 04:19:59 PM
https://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2021/11/23/fear-is-deadlier-than-viruses-n2599517 (https://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2021/11/23/fear-is-deadlier-than-viruses-n2599517)

Quote

The most famous words of Franklin Roosevelt, America's longest-serving president, were, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."

One wonders if any world leader would or could say that today. We live in the Age of Fear.

All of my life, I thought love and hate were the two most powerful human emotions.

But owing to recent events, I have changed my mind.

I now understand that for most people, fear is the strongest emotion.

In fact, I've come to realize that it is possible to get people to do anything if you instill enough fear in them. Specifically, irrational fear.

Fear of COVID-19, for example, is rational. But media and governments induced irrational fears. That's why millions of healthy people stayed indoors for a year or more, why a vast number of people wore masks while walking or sitting alone outdoors, and why so many parents did not allow their young children to play with other children for a year or more, even though the COVID-19 mortality rate among children was considerably less than the flu's mortality rate among children.

All of this was caused by irrational fear. It turns out that fear is not only more powerful than love and hate; in most people it is more powerful than reason. And when it is, it is far more destructive -- to the individual and to society -- than rational fear.

What is rational fear? When a soldier fears going into battle, that is rational. Soldiers cannot allow fear to control their behavior, but their fear is not irrational. If a mugger points a gun at you, it is rational to feel fear. If you are diagnosed with cancer, it is rational to experience fear.

Rational fear is not necessarily a bad thing. It is irrational fear that does the most harm -- to yourself, to others and to all of society.

The Salem witch trials of the 17th century exemplified irrational fear leading to evil: the killing of women who were believed to be witches.

You would think that the Enlightenment of the 18th century, with its focus on reason and science, would have led to a great lessening of irrational fear.

It hasn't.

To cite a number of examples, an unknowable (but not small) number of Americans -- usually among the best educated -- prohibited their parents from seeing their grandchildren, either because the grandparents or the grandchildren were not vaccinated. They did this despite the fact that the number of young people infected with COVID-19 was close to zero and despite the fact that there were extremely few cases of children infecting adults. Sweden kept its schools open for all students under the age of 16 throughout the pandemic, and studies have since confirmed that the risk to Swedish teachers of infection by students was extremely low. Such is the power of irrational fear.

To take another contemporary example, many people have decided not to have children because they fear that a warming planet represents an "existential threat" to life. Now, it is rational to be concerned about climate change, but it is irrational not to have children because of it. And it gets even more irrational. Their parents often support this decision, despite their deep yearning to be grandparents.

Irrational fear is also a major source of hatred. People hate what they fear. It was Germans' irrational fear of Jews -- people who made up under 1% of the German population -- that led to the unique evil known as the Holocaust.

Given the awful power of fear, what can you do to be less fearful?

The first thing you must do is determine whether your fears are rational or irrational.

And that can only be accomplished by thoroughly studying the issue -- whatever it happens to be: global warming, a pandemic, racism or any other divisive subject.

For example, black people are told to fear white police because white police are racist and want to do them harm. This is largely an irrational fear. It is well-documented that in any given recent year, the number of unarmed black Americans killed by police is under 20 -- nearly all of whom posed serious threats to the lives of the policemen who killed them.

Another example: Credible scientists and other experts who acknowledge that global warming is taking place, but contend that it is not an existential threat to life, are dismissed as "anti-science" and their views suppressed. Read them, and many of your fears will be allayed. (You might even decide to have children.)

Most fears are stoked by governments and their allies in mass media and in Big Tech, who in turn suppress contrary opinions. Therefore, please understand that when you hear only one opinion, and that opinion is designed to make you afraid, there is a good chance that your fears are irrational.

Determining whether your fears are rational or irrational is one of the most important things you will ever do. The quality of your life and the life of your society depend on your making that distinction.

Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 23, 2021, 05:57:46 PM
But the virus is a real threat, just as real as the mugger with a gun or the enemy soldier across No Man’s Land.
The exact level of the threat may not be known, but the threat is real.
And there is the risk/benefit factor. Or maybe it’s the fear/“brave” factor.
Go ahead. Do not fear when your unvaccinated children who go to school with 800 other children visit their grandparents (when grandma is a cancer survivor) and sit on their laps. Be brave. Maybe they won’t bring the disease to someone for whom it might be fatal.
It is not fear that keeps me from driving 90 miles per hour. (I tried it once.) it’s common sense.
Hey, guys! I have never been so afraid of my house being invaded that I bought a gun.  I have never feared, even though at times I have had to wander dicey parts of New York and New Jersey, being attacked to the level that I sought a carry permit.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 24, 2021, 01:43:03 PM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 24, 2021, 02:48:52 PM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

But those 800,000 deaths are not deaths from COVID, they are deaths with COVID.  There is a huge difference.  Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 24, 2021, 02:52:30 PM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

The argument in this thread is not whether COVID is dangerous.  The argument is how dangerous it is and what measures are appropriate to take.  While it is clearly appropriate for older people with comorbidities to take precautions, it's less dangerous for younger people.  This is exactly the reason why the former group were prioritized for vaccination while the latter group had to wait.  It simply does not make sense for children to be treated identically with older people with comorbidities.

Your example of backseat monitors is exactly the same sort of overblown fear.  Why doesn't this get the same sort of coverage?  Good question.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 24, 2021, 03:07:56 PM
Probably a fair number of people spoke against the back seat monitor requirement, and probably the inventor of some key bit of technology or manufacturer of suitable monitors greased a fair number of palms to get the government to mandate that carmakers purchase their products. People don’t speak out against this kind of overreach because it only affects anyone tangentially. By the time I’m in the market for a car with one of those monitors, I’ll have to pay slightly more for a feature I don’t want and I will never use. Okay, bummer. That is years from now and just a hidden cost that I’ll never see singled out of the total. If they mandated every existing car be retrofitted with such a monitor, and they did it not by vote of Congress but by decree, then you’d see people react against it. It would mean they had no real voice in their own government and it would be something that forced them to take action they didn’t want to take.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 24, 2021, 04:33:14 PM
Pastor Bohler:
Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.
Me:
That’s BS. It’s an urban myth that has been tossed around wildly and debunked in several places, including by the CDC.
I really do not understand your attempts to minimize almost every aspect of this deadly pandemic.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 24, 2021, 04:44:33 PM

I really do not understand your attempts to minimize almost every aspect of this deadly pandemic.
Agreed that you don't understand. What might be some possibilities? Is it just that Pr. Bohler doesn't care about human life? That he can't read? Or might there be completely reasonable dynamics in play that lead to differing responses to the pandemic?

i've read articles today saying people should insist all their Thanksgiving guests be rapid tested before stepping the door. To some people, that is a perfectly reasonable. To me, it isn't. I just don't understand what you understand all too well-- the temptation to live in panic and to demand the world be shut down until danger disappears. If you are vulnerable, stay home. That makes sense. Don't demand that everyone else stay. That doesn't make sense.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 24, 2021, 04:49:08 PM
Pastor Bohler:
Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.
Me:
That’s BS. It’s an urban myth that has been tossed around wildly and debunked in several places, including by the CDC.
I really do not understand your attempts to minimize almost every aspect of this deadly pandemic.

Even the CDC uses the term "died with COVID".  Perhaps you could point to the CDC debunking of this?

Quote from: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6928e1.htm
Characteristics of Persons Who Died with COVID-19 — United States, February 12–May 18, 2020
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 24, 2021, 05:00:18 PM
Pastor Bohler:
Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.
Me:
That’s BS. It’s an urban myth that has been tossed around wildly and debunked in several places, including by the CDC.
I really do not understand your attempts to minimize almost every aspect of this deadly pandemic.

Here's a few:

https://www.foxnews.com/media/physician-blasts-cdc-coronavirus-death-count-guidelines

https://www.skyhinews.com/news/coroner-state-included-a-murder-suicide-in-grands-covid-deaths/

https://www.westernjournal.com/washington-inflates-covid-19-numbers-includes-gunshot-victims-among-deaths/

https://www.kmov.com/news/colorado-coroner-calling-out-how-state-classifies-covid-19-deaths/article_297e3550-4131-11eb-9f01-ffe3e11d0f46.html

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/514915-is-us-covid-19-death-count-inflated

You want more?  Learn how to use Google for yourself.  But note that last one.  Using the CDC's own statistics, 94% of COVID deaths had at least one other co-morbidity.  Only 6% were deaths due strictly to COVID.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 24, 2021, 05:06:26 PM
See my comment over on that other thread. Do you not understand that those people with that “comorbidity“ would not have died from it have they not contracted the virus?
I don’t get your purpose. Or, what I do get about it I find obscene
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 24, 2021, 05:11:45 PM
See my comment over on that other thread. Do you not understand that those people with that “comorbidity“ would not have died from it have they not contracted the virus?
I don’t get your purpose. Or, what I do get about it I find obscene

On that other thread, you wrote: "Peter, I understand that you are posing for the sake of your argument. But it’s not the least bit convincing. Pastor Bohler, I’m ignoring you again. Life just isn’t worth the irritation of dealing with your intentional and overreaching pretenses. I think you may be taking them as wittiness, but you’re wrong about that too. But for the moment, I’ll consider what you posted. Hey people! Guess what! There were not 746,000 deaths from Covid. They were only 735,000 deaths from Covid. The other 11,000 only died with Covid. Isn’t that great?"

I respond: "You are not very good at numbers and math, obviously.  The CDC stats are that only 6% of COVID deaths were actually from COVID, while the other 94% had at least one co-morbidity.  So, the numbers would be 48,000 died of COVID and the other 752,000 would have died with other causes in addition to COVID.  And some of those 752,000 clearly were not the result of COVID at all (like the murder-suicide in Colorado)."
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on November 24, 2021, 05:25:56 PM
Do you not understand that those people with that “comorbidity“ would not have died from it have they not contracted the virus?

"Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc." are those people. How interesting that they all would have survived had it not been for COVID.   ::) Speaking of "BS"!
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: DeHall1 on November 24, 2021, 06:01:43 PM
...Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration...

                              -- Frank Herbert
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 24, 2021, 06:15:16 PM
You are trying to tell me that only 6% of those 750,000 people actually died of Covid?
Given the numbers discussed everywhere, including the conservative and wacko conservative media, I don’t see how I can believe that.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 24, 2021, 06:26:07 PM
You are trying to tell me that only 6% of those 750,000 people actually died of Covid?
Given the numbers discussed everywhere, including the conservative and wacko conservative media, I don’t see how I can believe that.

You might do better to cite some of those numbers (especially those on the "wacko conservative media" sites) than just making unsupported statements.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 24, 2021, 07:21:42 PM
You are trying to tell me that only 6% of those 750,000 people actually died of Covid?
Given the numbers discussed everywhere, including the conservative and wacko conservative media, I don’t see how I can believe that.

Well, your argument is not with me, it is with the CDC.  Those are their figures.  If you would bother to read the linked articles.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: JEdwards on November 24, 2021, 10:41:15 PM
Using the CDC's own statistics, 94% of COVID deaths had at least one other co-morbidity.  Only 6% were deaths due strictly to COVID.
Well, yes, but death certificates routinely list many co-morbidities; many common ones are being overweight, being a smoker, having high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or asthma. Having a co-morbidity indicates that the individual does not enjoy ideal health, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that the person was so decrepit and frail that he would have died in the near future anyway, virus or no virus. I’m happy to stipulate that COVID is extremely unlikely to kill a young, healthy athlete, but most Americans are near the middle of the bell curve, with at least one less-than-ideal health characteristic, so I don't think the statistics you cite undermine the significance of the reported death toll.
Peace,
Jon
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 24, 2021, 10:52:16 PM
That is the point. The numbers are not exaggerated. You dismiss the “94%”. But they would’ve lived on, perhaps not healthy, but alive, had it not been for this virus.
To attempt to remove their death from the total statistics is curious,if not atrocious, if not obscene. They are all our neighbors who died of the virus, often because it had not been taken seriously, efforts to mitigate its affects were mocked or ignored , or people followed stupid advice..
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 24, 2021, 10:59:32 PM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

But those 800,000 deaths are not deaths from COVID, they are deaths with COVID.  There is a huge difference.  Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.

I believe the CDC and other public health authorities have worked overtime to dispel this myth. For instance:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210319/TRANSCRIPT_STATCAST_031921.pdf

Money Quote:

HOST: Another example that has confused people in the past: someone is in a car crash and maybe the victim had COVID or develops COVID, and people get confused - how can COVID be responsible for somebody who's been injured in a car crash? What will you tell folks who are confused about that?

ROBERT ANDERSON: Well it really depends on the circumstances. In cases where the death is clearly the result of trauma caused by the crash, whether the decedent had COVID-19 or not should be irrelevant. COVID-19 is not a factor in those cases. Now, in these cases it should not be counted as COVID-19 deaths - because the trauma caused the death, not any sort of viral infection that person might have had. However, we do know of cases where people have been hospitalized with serious but not life-threatening trauma from a car crash, who contracted COVID-19 in the hospital and then subsequently died as result of COVID-19. So in a case like that the crash and the trauma might be a contributing factor, but the underlying cause was COVID-19. So that was the primary cause of death because that's what caused them to die when they died - it wasn't the trauma. So it's complicated and it does depend on the circumstances.

And the argument of died "from Covid" versus died "with Covid" is akin to the old saw about AIDS… no one "technically" died from AIDS, after all. But if you got HIV before there were effective treatments, that technicality wasn't going to give you much comfort.  Accordingly, every measure of excess mortality in the known world is showing that people are, actually, dying in this pandemic. And in large numbers.

And meanwhile, we're not even talking about all the other lasting effects of Covid… I've been part of a CDC recognized rehab program for long covid for the last six months. They are treating everyone from octogenarians who barely survived to NCAA athletes who were, previously, in peak physical condition. It took me 6 months of bi-weekly PT to be able to recover enough stamina to lead a halfway normal life, and I'm 39, but sure… covid is only a big deal for the elderly.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 24, 2021, 11:13:55 PM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

But those 800,000 deaths are not deaths from COVID, they are deaths with COVID.  There is a huge difference.  Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.

I believe the CDC and other public health authorities have worked overtime to dispel this myth. For instance:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210319/TRANSCRIPT_STATCAST_031921.pdf

Money Quote:

HOST: Another example that has confused people in the past: someone is in a car crash and maybe the victim had COVID or develops COVID, and people get confused - how can COVID be responsible for somebody who's been injured in a car crash? What will you tell folks who are confused about that?

ROBERT ANDERSON: Well it really depends on the circumstances. In cases where the death is clearly the result of trauma caused by the crash, whether the decedent had COVID-19 or not should be irrelevant. COVID-19 is not a factor in those cases. Now, in these cases it should not be counted as COVID-19 deaths - because the trauma caused the death, not any sort of viral infection that person might have had. However, we do know of cases where people have been hospitalized with serious but not life-threatening trauma from a car crash, who contracted COVID-19 in the hospital and then subsequently died as result of COVID-19. So in a case like that the crash and the trauma might be a contributing factor, but the underlying cause was COVID-19. So that was the primary cause of death because that's what caused them to die when they died - it wasn't the trauma. So it's complicated and it does depend on the circumstances.

And the argument of died "from Covid" versus died "with Covid" is akin to the old saw about AIDS… no one "technically" died from AIDS, after all. But if you got HIV before there were effective treatments, that technicality wasn't going to give you much comfort.  Accordingly, every measure of excess mortality in the known world is showing that people are, actually, dying in this pandemic. And in large numbers.

And meanwhile, we're not even talking about all the other lasting effects of Covid… I've been part of a CDC recognized rehab program for long covid for the last six months. They are treating everyone from octogenarians who barely survived to NCAA athletes who were, previously, in peak physical condition. It took me 6 months of bi-weekly PT to be able to recover enough stamina to lead a halfway normal life, and I'm 39, but sure… covid is only a big deal for the elderly.

1. "...should not be counted" is not the same as "are not counted".  And we know that some of those that, according to this little snippet, "should not be counted" WERE counted.  How many?  No idea.  But some (as the Colorado coroner pointed out in the case of the murder-suicide). 

2. No one has said that "covid is only a big deal for the elderly".
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 25, 2021, 12:14:31 AM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

But those 800,000 deaths are not deaths from COVID, they are deaths with COVID.  There is a huge difference.  Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.

I believe the CDC and other public health authorities have worked overtime to dispel this myth. For instance:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210319/TRANSCRIPT_STATCAST_031921.pdf

Money Quote:

HOST: Another example that has confused people in the past: someone is in a car crash and maybe the victim had COVID or develops COVID, and people get confused - how can COVID be responsible for somebody who's been injured in a car crash? What will you tell folks who are confused about that?

ROBERT ANDERSON: Well it really depends on the circumstances. In cases where the death is clearly the result of trauma caused by the crash, whether the decedent had COVID-19 or not should be irrelevant. COVID-19 is not a factor in those cases. Now, in these cases it should not be counted as COVID-19 deaths - because the trauma caused the death, not any sort of viral infection that person might have had. However, we do know of cases where people have been hospitalized with serious but not life-threatening trauma from a car crash, who contracted COVID-19 in the hospital and then subsequently died as result of COVID-19. So in a case like that the crash and the trauma might be a contributing factor, but the underlying cause was COVID-19. So that was the primary cause of death because that's what caused them to die when they died - it wasn't the trauma. So it's complicated and it does depend on the circumstances.

And the argument of died "from Covid" versus died "with Covid" is akin to the old saw about AIDS… no one "technically" died from AIDS, after all. But if you got HIV before there were effective treatments, that technicality wasn't going to give you much comfort.  Accordingly, every measure of excess mortality in the known world is showing that people are, actually, dying in this pandemic. And in large numbers.

And meanwhile, we're not even talking about all the other lasting effects of Covid… I've been part of a CDC recognized rehab program for long covid for the last six months. They are treating everyone from octogenarians who barely survived to NCAA athletes who were, previously, in peak physical condition. It took me 6 months of bi-weekly PT to be able to recover enough stamina to lead a halfway normal life, and I'm 39, but sure… covid is only a big deal for the elderly.

1. "...should not be counted" is not the same as "are not counted".  And we know that some of those that, according to this little snippet, "should not be counted" WERE counted.  How many?  No idea.  But some (as the Colorado coroner pointed out in the case of the murder-suicide). 

2. No one has said that "covid is only a big deal for the elderly".

I encourage to read the entire interview, which goes to great length to describe how much effort is put into making sure numbers are as accurate as possible and reflect actual deaths from the virus. And the plural of anecdote is not data. If anything, the official number is a significant undercount, based on what is showing up in the data about excess deaths.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 25, 2021, 04:32:47 AM
Thank you, Dana Lockhart. I was trying to cut and paste the portions of that interview which debunked the “they didn’t really die from Covid” myth, but it got too complicated. Read the whole interview and the CDC Interpretation of the data. If anything, the number of deaths is under-reported.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 25, 2021, 09:35:42 AM
https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/kmov.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/0/85/085be368-4ca2-11ec-8ca9-634fb8ef3e90/619d5946b9df6.pdf.pdf

This court case sets limits on what can be done by bureaucratic fiat rather than by vote of elected representatives to mitigate Covid.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dave Benke on November 25, 2021, 10:34:51 AM
We are approaching 800,000 deaths in the US alone.

At the present moment, this virus is killing more people every three days than 9/11 did.

It has killed more than the entire opioid crisis.

Soon, every new car will be required to have a backseat monitor as a standard safety feature, because there have been 1,000 instances of babies dying from being left in the backseats of cars in the last 30 years. Where are the editorials decrying this overblown fear?

And at what point do these obtuse editorials stop? When Covid kills more than the combined combat fatalities of all wars fought by the United States? Would it be a real and rational fear then?

I think our response, as a nation, to 9/11 was excessive and ill-considered. But I also remember what those days were like, the real concerns that further attacks were imminent... you can only judge actions based on the information available to leaders at the time.

And given what we know about Covid, and what could have happened, and what might yet still happen, I think our leaders have managed as best they can. And they have done so despite the this persistent denial of the reality and lethality of this virus...  It's just a bad flu year... what's all the fuss about?

800,000 deaths later... a decade's worth of bad flu years in under 2 years... I think we should give this a rest.

But those 800,000 deaths are not deaths from COVID, they are deaths with COVID.  There is a huge difference.  Car accident victims, gun shot victims, heart attack victims, etc. who died from THOSE causes were/are included in the COVID deaths if they had (or even, in some cases, if it was merely suspected that they had) COVID.

I believe the CDC and other public health authorities have worked overtime to dispel this myth. For instance:

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/podcasts/2021/20210319/TRANSCRIPT_STATCAST_031921.pdf

Money Quote:

HOST: Another example that has confused people in the past: someone is in a car crash and maybe the victim had COVID or develops COVID, and people get confused - how can COVID be responsible for somebody who's been injured in a car crash? What will you tell folks who are confused about that?

ROBERT ANDERSON: Well it really depends on the circumstances. In cases where the death is clearly the result of trauma caused by the crash, whether the decedent had COVID-19 or not should be irrelevant. COVID-19 is not a factor in those cases. Now, in these cases it should not be counted as COVID-19 deaths - because the trauma caused the death, not any sort of viral infection that person might have had. However, we do know of cases where people have been hospitalized with serious but not life-threatening trauma from a car crash, who contracted COVID-19 in the hospital and then subsequently died as result of COVID-19. So in a case like that the crash and the trauma might be a contributing factor, but the underlying cause was COVID-19. So that was the primary cause of death because that's what caused them to die when they died - it wasn't the trauma. So it's complicated and it does depend on the circumstances.

And the argument of died "from Covid" versus died "with Covid" is akin to the old saw about AIDS… no one "technically" died from AIDS, after all. But if you got HIV before there were effective treatments, that technicality wasn't going to give you much comfort.  Accordingly, every measure of excess mortality in the known world is showing that people are, actually, dying in this pandemic. And in large numbers.

And meanwhile, we're not even talking about all the other lasting effects of Covid… I've been part of a CDC recognized rehab program for long covid for the last six months. They are treating everyone from octogenarians who barely survived to NCAA athletes who were, previously, in peak physical condition. It took me 6 months of bi-weekly PT to be able to recover enough stamina to lead a halfway normal life, and I'm 39, but sure… covid is only a big deal for the elderly.

1. "...should not be counted" is not the same as "are not counted".  And we know that some of those that, according to this little snippet, "should not be counted" WERE counted.  How many?  No idea.  But some (as the Colorado coroner pointed out in the case of the murder-suicide). 

2. No one has said that "covid is only a big deal for the elderly".

I encourage to read the entire interview, which goes to great length to describe how much effort is put into making sure numbers are as accurate as possible and reflect actual deaths from the virus. And the plural of anecdote is not data. If anything, the official number is a significant undercount, based on what is showing up in the data about excess deaths.

Thanks for this, Dana Lockhart - going to a family gathering for Thanksgiving where one family member witnessed the devastations of COVID first-hand.  He has no patience for those who are misled and those who mislead.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: RogerMartim on November 25, 2021, 11:40:29 AM
Pastor Boehler, I am not sure why you want to deflect from the seriousness of COVID-19. It is not to be pooh-paahed. Even if one survives COVID-19, the long-term effects of it is still unknown. Many diseases can be a "side" effect of another which causes death. AIDS is one example. No one dies from AIDS. It is opportunistic diseases that take over a weakened immune system that is caused by AIDS. My best friend died of pneumonia but on his death certificate it lists AIDS as the cause of death. Obituaries list AIDS as the reason for death. My newspaper has listed many with obituaries where COVID-19 is the cause of death. So COVID-19 is a dangerous disease and we must take every precaution to minimize what it may do to us and others.
On this subject, I find it difficult to understand why so many are nonchalant about the mandate and vaccine choice. The Gospels are replete with admonitions of love of neighbor. It is obvious that there is a phase of a person being asymptomatic in which the virus can be passed on to others. In group settings such as many today at Thanksgiving dinners, this deadly virus will be passed on to many and I would not be surprised if there will be another huge spike in deaths of those who will not be around next Thanksgiving.
Fear doesn't kill. COVID-19 can and does.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 25, 2021, 12:18:17 PM
Pastor Boehler, I am not sure why you want to deflect from the seriousness of COVID-19. It is not to be pooh-paahed. Even if one survives COVID-19, the long-term effects of it is still unknown. Many diseases can be a "side" effect of another which causes death. AIDS is one example. No one dies from AIDS. It is opportunistic diseases that take over a weakened immune system that is caused by AIDS. My best friend died of pneumonia but on his death certificate it lists AIDS as the cause of death. Obituaries list AIDS as the reason for death. My newspaper has listed many with obituaries where COVID-19 is the cause of death. So COVID-19 is a dangerous disease and we must take every precaution to minimize what it may do to us and others.
On this subject, I find it difficult to understand why so many are nonchalant about the mandate and vaccine choice. The Gospels are replete with admonitions of love of neighbor. It is obvious that there is a phase of a person being asymptomatic in which the virus can be passed on to others. In group settings such as many today at Thanksgiving dinners, this deadly virus will be passed on to many and I would not be surprised if there will be another huge spike in deaths of those who will not be around next Thanksgiving.
Fear doesn't kill. COVID-19 can and does.
The long term effect of the vaccine is also still unknown. That's one reason some people refuse to take it. I know at least one person who refuses to take it because the vaccine killed her father. My elderly parents who mostly stayed home anyway made a conscious decision last year that they would rather risk getting the virus than not have their children, grandchildren, and great-children visit them. While I am vaccinated, I know for a fact the people I'm talking about are wise and faithful Christians, so any account of mandate and vaccine resistance that explains it as simply unChristian behavior is demonstrably false. You have to come up with a different explanation or leave it alone. You and Charles both find it difficult to understand. Okay, fine. But if you could both say, "I don't understand," and leave it at that everything would be fine. Yes, you don't understand other people's choices. Maybe some day you will. But for sure the explanation is not that they are unfaithful, don't know the words of Jesus, are stupid, don't care about their neighbor, and any other such explanation.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 25, 2021, 12:41:11 PM
Pastor Boehler, I am not sure why you want to deflect from the seriousness of COVID-19. It is not to be pooh-paahed. Even if one survives COVID-19, the long-term effects of it is still unknown. Many diseases can be a "side" effect of another which causes death. AIDS is one example. No one dies from AIDS. It is opportunistic diseases that take over a weakened immune system that is caused by AIDS. My best friend died of pneumonia but on his death certificate it lists AIDS as the cause of death. Obituaries list AIDS as the reason for death. My newspaper has listed many with obituaries where COVID-19 is the cause of death. So COVID-19 is a dangerous disease and we must take every precaution to minimize what it may do to us and others.
On this subject, I find it difficult to understand why so many are nonchalant about the mandate and vaccine choice. The Gospels are replete with admonitions of love of neighbor. It is obvious that there is a phase of a person being asymptomatic in which the virus can be passed on to others. In group settings such as many today at Thanksgiving dinners, this deadly virus will be passed on to many and I would not be surprised if there will be another huge spike in deaths of those who will not be around next Thanksgiving.
Fear doesn't kill. COVID-19 can and does.
The long term effect of the vaccine is also still unknown. That's one reason some people refuse to take it. I know at least one person who refuses to take it because the vaccine killed her father. My elderly parents who mostly stayed home anyway made a conscious decision last year that they would rather risk getting the virus than not have their children, grandchildren, and great-children visit them. While I am vaccinated, I know for a fact the people I'm talking about are wise and faithful Christians, so any account of mandate and vaccine resistance that explains it as simply unChristian behavior is demonstrably false. You have to come up with a different explanation or leave it alone. You and Charles both find it difficult to understand. Okay, fine. But if you could both say, "I don't understand," and leave it at that everything would be fine. Yes, you don't understand other people's choices. Maybe some day you will. But for sure the explanation is not that they are unfaithful, don't know the words of Jesus, are stupid, don't care about their neighbor, and any other such explanation.


I think that you need to explain to us how refusing to be vaccinated is a way of showing Christian love for neighbors.


Sometimes what is called faithfulness is not. For example, those who tell a blind person (or anyone with a handicapping condition,) "If you just had enough faith, God would heal you." (A comment from a speaker who was blind. Her response after hearing that too many times, "I read in the Bible that if you had enough faith, you could pray for me and God would heal me.")


Or, to use a probably untrue story: The minister got in the pulpit while silently praying that God would give him a message for that day. As he waited, he heard a voice in his head tell him, "You're lazy."


Some truth to that. When I was on gospel teams, there were folks who didn't want to work on their testimonies because they believed that God would give them the words to say. Were they being faithful and trusting or lazy? I've argued that if the Spirit can give them words in a split second, how much better might it be if the Spirit was working on them for an hour of preparation. (I also note that when Scripture state that the Spirit will give us the words to say, it's only in the context of being arrested and defending ourselves.)
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 25, 2021, 12:58:14 PM
Pastor Boehler, I am not sure why you want to deflect from the seriousness of COVID-19. It is not to be pooh-paahed. Even if one survives COVID-19, the long-term effects of it is still unknown. Many diseases can be a "side" effect of another which causes death. AIDS is one example. No one dies from AIDS. It is opportunistic diseases that take over a weakened immune system that is caused by AIDS. My best friend died of pneumonia but on his death certificate it lists AIDS as the cause of death. Obituaries list AIDS as the reason for death. My newspaper has listed many with obituaries where COVID-19 is the cause of death. So COVID-19 is a dangerous disease and we must take every precaution to minimize what it may do to us and others.
On this subject, I find it difficult to understand why so many are nonchalant about the mandate and vaccine choice. The Gospels are replete with admonitions of love of neighbor. It is obvious that there is a phase of a person being asymptomatic in which the virus can be passed on to others. In group settings such as many today at Thanksgiving dinners, this deadly virus will be passed on to many and I would not be surprised if there will be another huge spike in deaths of those who will not be around next Thanksgiving.
Fear doesn't kill. COVID-19 can and does.
The long term effect of the vaccine is also still unknown. That's one reason some people refuse to take it. I know at least one person who refuses to take it because the vaccine killed her father. My elderly parents who mostly stayed home anyway made a conscious decision last year that they would rather risk getting the virus than not have their children, grandchildren, and great-children visit them. While I am vaccinated, I know for a fact the people I'm talking about are wise and faithful Christians, so any account of mandate and vaccine resistance that explains it as simply unChristian behavior is demonstrably false. You have to come up with a different explanation or leave it alone. You and Charles both find it difficult to understand. Okay, fine. But if you could both say, "I don't understand," and leave it at that everything would be fine. Yes, you don't understand other people's choices. Maybe some day you will. But for sure the explanation is not that they are unfaithful, don't know the words of Jesus, are stupid, don't care about their neighbor, and any other such explanation.


I think that you need to explain to us how refusing to be vaccinated is a way of showing Christian love for neighbors.


Sometimes what is called faithfulness is not. For example, those who tell a blind person (or anyone with a handicapping condition,) "If you just had enough faith, God would heal you." (A comment from a speaker who was blind. Her response after hearing that too many times, "I read in the Bible that if you had enough faith, you could pray for me and God would heal me.")


Or, to use a probably untrue story: The minister got in the pulpit while silently praying that God would give him a message for that day. As he waited, he heard a voice in his head tell him, "You're lazy."


Some truth to that. When I was on gospel teams, there were folks who didn't want to work on their testimonies because they believed that God would give them the words to say. Were they being faithful and trusting or lazy? I've argued that if the Spirit can give them words in a split second, how much better might it be if the Spirit was working on them for an hour of preparation. (I also note that when Scripture state that the Spirit will give us the words to say, it's only in the context of being arrested and defending ourselves.)
I don’t need to explain any such thing. I simply need to point out that at least some people who refuse the vaccine are exceedingly faithful, loving, and wise Christians who lead lives marked chiefly by self-sacrificial live and service to their neighbor. Given that, your account if things remains implausible if it can only hold up by labeling such people falsely as foolish, selfish, etc.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: RogerMartim on November 25, 2021, 03:25:00 PM
Pastor Speckhard, almost 195,000,000 people in the US have been fully vaccinated and you mention someone you know whose father died from the vaccine. This is an anomaly statistically speaking if this is what happened. It sounds almost like Nikki Minaj pontifically stating on TikTok that her cousin in Trinidad had a friend who was vaccinated and came away impotent with swollen testicles—none of which has been verified. I still say that love of neighbor supercedes any personal viewpoints that the vaccine down the road is going to turn someone into something whatever the imagination floats. It isn't love when someone says that they are going to take their chances.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 25, 2021, 03:33:33 PM
Peter, folks might be faithful, loving, and wise, but not on every single topic. With regard to the virus in the vaccines, they might still be exceedingly foolish.
Furthermore, I need not be tolerant of other peoples decisions who might actually affect my ability to resist the sickness and not die.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dan Fienen on November 25, 2021, 03:42:04 PM
<<snip>>
Furthermore, I need not be tolerant of other peoples decisions who might actually affect my ability to resist the sickness and not die.
Especially if you already know that you are more knowledgeable and wiser than those fools and could not possibly be wrong. Must be nice to be so knowledgeable that you can totally ignore any possibility that the people upon whom you rely for information might be wrong.

By the by, how do the actions of people in Indiana affect your ability to resist the sickness and not die? Are you suggesting that the people around Peter are intending to kill you?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 25, 2021, 04:04:41 PM
I don’t need to explain any such thing. I simply need to point out that at least some people who refuse the vaccine are exceedingly faithful, loving, and wise Christians who lead lives marked chiefly by self-sacrificial live and service to their neighbor. Given that, your account if things remains implausible if it can only hold up by labeling such people falsely as foolish, selfish, etc.


A good friend's step-father nearly died from COVID, but she, being very active in church, refuses to be vaccinated. I do think her decision is foolish. I think that it's an appropriate label.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on November 25, 2021, 04:06:21 PM
Furthermore, I need not be tolerant of other peoples decisions who might actually affect my ability to resist the sickness and not die.

And if that’s what you fear, [Charles], then…
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 25, 2021, 04:35:58 PM
Pastor Fienen:
Especially if you already know that you are more knowledgeable and wiser than those fools and could not possibly be wrong. Must be nice to be so knowledgeable that you can totally ignore any possibility that the people upon whom you rely for information might be wrong.

Me:
I am indeed wiser than some fools. So are you, Pastor Fienen.  If the people I rely on for information happened to be wrong, and of course I have made the decision that they are not wrong, then my efforts to mitigate the impact of the virus may not accomplish anything. And I will have gone to a bit of trouble but may not have been necessary.
But if the fools are wrong, and of course I believe they are, then their foolish refusal to mitigate the effects of the pandemic can have a grave impact upon themselves and the lives of the people around them.
But I have said that before.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 25, 2021, 04:43:36 PM
Pastor Speckhard, almost 195,000,000 people in the US have been fully vaccinated and you mention someone you know whose father died from the vaccine. This is an anomaly statistically speaking if this is what happened. It sounds almost like Nikki Minaj pontifically stating on TikTok that her cousin in Trinidad had a friend who was vaccinated and came away impotent with swollen testicles—none of which has been verified. I still say that love of neighbor supercedes any personal viewpoints that the vaccine down the road is going to turn someone into something whatever the imagination floats. It isn't love when someone says that they are going to take their chances.
My point was not about the statistics of deaths. My point was that the people I know who don’t want to be vaccinated are not guilty of things you and Charles attribute to them—lovelessness, foolishness, and selfishness. Until you can understand them, which you can’t, you should limit your opinion to “I don’t understand.” When you go on to say that you don’t understand how they can be so foolish or selfish, you make your own inability to understand into an accusation.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 25, 2021, 04:50:09 PM
Sometimes, Peter, the when one says “I don’t understand,” the meaning is actually “I do understand and I’m so shocked at what I understand thatI don’t know how the other person can believe this.”
I understand when someone is swayed by or drawn into a cult or a semi cult. I have known such people, and I understand What with them under the spell or into the cult. But when I say I do not understand them, it means that I do not understand how a person such as they, reasonably intelligent, reasonably well educated, can come to such stupid conclusions and do such stupid things.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 25, 2021, 05:10:00 PM
Sometimes, Peter, the when one says “I don’t understand,” the meaning is actually “I do understand and I’m so shocked at what I understand thatI don’t know how the other person can believe this.”
I understand when someone is swayed by or drawn into a cult or a semi cult. I have known such people, and I understand What with them under the spell or into the cult. But when I say I do not understand them, it means that I do not understand how a person such as they, reasonably intelligent, reasonably well educated, can come to such stupid conclusions and do such stupid things.
Which is what I said. You have no recourse but to compare such people to cultists because you don’t understand them. Why not just admit that you genuinely don’t understand them without comparing them to cultists, which they manifestly are nothing like? You are terrified much of the time. You regularly post about how frightened you are by various people. Fear doesn’t lead to rational evaluation.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 25, 2021, 07:13:04 PM
A good friend's step-father nearly died from COVID, but she, being very active in church, refuses to be vaccinated. I do think her decision is foolish. I think that it's an appropriate label.

I am indeed wiser than some fools. So are you, Pastor Fienen.  If the people I rely on for information happened to be wrong, and of course I have made the decision that they are not wrong, then my efforts to mitigate the impact of the virus may not accomplish anything. And I will have gone to a bit of trouble but may not have been necessary.
But if the fools are wrong, and of course I believe they are, then their foolish refusal to mitigate the effects of the pandemic can have a grave impact upon themselves and the lives of the people around them.
But I have said that before.

And calling people fools sure helps convince them that you are correct.  Thanks for making it harder to convince people to be vaccinated.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 25, 2021, 08:17:28 PM
For heaven sake’s, Mr. Rustad. I’m not speaking to any of those people here. Furthermore, I’m not trying to convince them of anything. Most of the time, arguing with a fool, while it can be amusing, doesn’t change anyone’s mind.
And I stick with my previous conclusion. Someone links up for a movement or follows a person on one item, and after a time that person is “all in” and has a cultist’s warped sense of “right” or “truth” or “loyalty.” I’m not saying that has happened to everyone here. I’m just saying that certain things can take hold of an otherwise “wise“ being.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 25, 2021, 11:57:12 PM
Sometimes, Peter, the when one says “I don’t understand,” the meaning is actually “I do understand and I’m so shocked at what I understand thatI don’t know how the other person can believe this.”
I understand when someone is swayed by or drawn into a cult or a semi cult. I have known such people, and I understand What with them under the spell or into the cult. But when I say I do not understand them, it means that I do not understand how a person such as they, reasonably intelligent, reasonably well educated, can come to such stupid conclusions and do such stupid things.
Which is what I said. You have no recourse but to compare such people to cultists because you don’t understand them. Why not just admit that you genuinely don’t understand them without comparing them to cultists, which they manifestly are nothing like? You are terrified much of the time. You regularly post about how frightened you are by various people. Fear doesn’t lead to rational evaluation.


In a discussion on another issue, my opponent said that I couldn't understand his position, because if I did I would agree with him. I then presented what I understood his position to be and the reasons he had for holding them. He admitted that I did understand his position. I reiterated that I still disagreed with it.


We can understand their reasons for refusing the vaccines, and still conclude that they are foolish reasons.


I can understand why people don't want to wear helmets when riding motorcycles. (I've even done it back when I had a motorcycle.) It's not a requirement in Arizona. I can also say that it's foolish to ride a motorcycle without proper protection: helmet, gloves, boots, long pants, jacket. Such foolish and dangerous decisions indicate nothing about a person's faith nor intelligence. Granted, in the years I rode, I never needed the protection of a helmet. Our son has ridden motorcycles for a few years and, thankfully, has never needed the protection of a helmet. To conclude that we no longer need to wear a helmet because we haven't needed it in the past, is foolish logic.



Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 12:25:53 AM
Sometimes, Peter, the when one says “I don’t understand,” the meaning is actually “I do understand and I’m so shocked at what I understand thatI don’t know how the other person can believe this.”
I understand when someone is swayed by or drawn into a cult or a semi cult. I have known such people, and I understand What with them under the spell or into the cult. But when I say I do not understand them, it means that I do not understand how a person such as they, reasonably intelligent, reasonably well educated, can come to such stupid conclusions and do such stupid things.
Which is what I said. You have no recourse but to compare such people to cultists because you don’t understand them. Why not just admit that you genuinely don’t understand them without comparing them to cultists, which they manifestly are nothing like? You are terrified much of the time. You regularly post about how frightened you are by various people. Fear doesn’t lead to rational evaluation.


In a discussion on another issue, my opponent said that I couldn't understand his position, because if I did I would agree with him. I then presented what I understood his position to be and the reasons he had for holding them. He admitted that I did understand his position. I reiterated that I still disagreed with it.


We can understand their reasons for refusing the vaccines, and still conclude that they are foolish reasons.


I can understand why people don't want to wear helmets when riding motorcycles. (I've even done it back when I had a motorcycle.) It's not a requirement in Arizona. I can also say that it's foolish to ride a motorcycle without proper protection: helmet, gloves, boots, long pants, jacket. Such foolish and dangerous decisions indicate nothing about a person's faith nor intelligence. Granted, in the years I rode, I never needed the protection of a helmet. Our son has ridden motorcycles for a few years and, thankfully, has never needed the protection of a helmet. To conclude that we no longer need to wear a helmet because we haven't needed it in the past, is foolish logic.
You can’t say it is foolish in any particular circumstance unless you know the pros and cons and the values of the person involved. If someone you know to be wise makes a deliberate, considered decision that you think foolish, that should give you pause. Maybe the decision isn’t foolish. And even if you maintain your position that he decided wrongly, you should at least now know that reasonable people can disagree simply because you’ve seen it happen. Not everyone is in the same position or values the same things or fears the same things.

Take a grocery store clerk in spring of 2020. Should they continue working or stay home? Certainly staying home reduced the risk of getting or transmitting Covid. But working in the store also served the neighbor and possibly fulfilled central vocations by providing for a family. People might make either choice in all wisdom and faithfulness depending upon their circumstances and assessment of the pros and cons. Why not let people make their own choices given that only they know all the factors weighing into their decisions? That is especially true of someone’s most personal and intimate health decisions. Unless they’re deliberately harming someone, they should make their own choices.

 
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dave Benke on November 26, 2021, 08:46:19 AM
I'm going to try to hunt down a booster shot today - the drug store boosters are experiencing a two to three week wait here in our fair city, host of the "We're Back" in person Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade yesterday.  To the thread topic, fear of the vaccines remains on my mind because hesitancy remains in the air in the black and brown communities, and the fear of being vaccinated outweighs, for those folks, the value of the vaccine.  It's not that these folks are bad or ignorant or foolish.  It's that they're afraid for their health more from taking the vaccine than from getting the virus. 

I personally don't think I can march directly toward the vaccine and receive it, all the shots necessary, and then opine that it's a good or helpful thing not to be vaccinated.  I would be lying about my own belief and motive.  I don't want the virus - having seen its depredations and results - and I want the vaccine because it prevents it and/or keeps the worst of its results from me.  That's just overwhelmingly the fact of the situation, tiny tiny outlier percentages aside.

At the same time, I don't think browbeating those who are not vaccinated works at all as a strategy.  It's a proven loser.  So I and my church leaders practice encouragement without judging, and because there are those who are not vaccinated in the assembly, continue to wear masks in church.  We have not found that simply by stating that we the leadership are vaccinated and encouraging vaccination we have alienated those who aren't.  It's kind of in the followup, the not browbeating, the listening, the continuation of mask policy for safety sake that we are moving forward with a "mixed multitude."  It's a fear mitigation stance.  Guess what?  It's not easy.  Nothing about this whole time period has been.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 26, 2021, 09:12:23 AM
In case I haven’t already made it clear, I don’t believe in screaming at individuals, yelling “you’re a fool! You’re selfish! You don’t care about others!“
I’m all for gentle persuasion. I’m also for society as a whole making that persuasion as effective as possible, and sometimes that means leaving the gentle part behind.
Repeat: you won’t hear me yelling at individuals. But you will hear me talking about the various segments of our population that refuse the vaccine, spread erroneous information about the vaccine, and otherwise impede the expansion of the protection the vaccine certainly provides.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 09:47:33 AM
How do you know what information about the vaccine is erroneous? The only thing you know about it is what you've been told. The argument among normal people is not about whether we should spread falsehoods or go by the truth. It is about whom we should trust. And that argument is generally not about individuals but about assumptions and larger frameworks. For example, some people refuse standard medical treatments in favor of natural, holistic care because they think reliance on pharmaceuticals is dangerous. In short, they don't trust the pharmaceutical companies and they reject the whole train of assumptions that says we should treat medical issues with pills. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong. It is matter of trust.  They don't reject the science that say this chemical will cause this reaction. They assert that there are more variables in play and more subtle side effects or unforeseen consequences than adding another chemical can account for. There is a whole alternative medical infrastructure to treat cancer without radiation or chemotherapy. Some people mock these subcultures as loony, but people in those subcultures look at patients in mainstream medicine like the old lady who swallowed a fly (and then a spider to catch the fly and so on until dying of swallowing a horse). Everyone knows someone who takes dozens of pills every day. Every one of them is probably proven to do some good. But most of the people swallowing handfuls of pills every day somehow manage not to be in good health. They're taking this one for the nausea caused by that one, and taking that one to help with the side effects of the other one. None of them is necessarily bad in itself. At some point it becomes a matter of whether you trust the whole strategy of treating health issues primarily with medications.

The reason I bring it up is that doctors go crazy trying to separate the medical information from the medical disinformation. But rarely does either side make a statement that is false. They make statements that undermine trust in this or that approach. If you ever read the original Atkins Diet book you see this in spades. His thesis was simple--- all the health issues and weight gain issues that the government and medical community was attributing to fat was really attributable to refined sugars and flours. Many people thought he was a genius. Many people thought he was nuts. He had success stories. He had detractors. He had science on his side. He had science against him.

There is no trusting "the science." Nobody in this forum has conducted any conclusive experiments on this virus. There can only be appeals to trust in individuals, institutions, and large scale ideas. Therefore, there is no way for anyone here to distinguish information from disinformation apart from an appeal to trust.   
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 09:55:44 AM
https://www.foxnews.com/health/new-covid-variant-southern-africa-nations-travel-ban

CDC is warning against knee jerk reactions and wants more data, but several countries are taking no chances. Another example of stopping the transmission not being the only important consideration. THere is danger in not shutting down air travel to southern Africa immediately. There is also danger in doing so, stranding many people, causing panic, or making people give up on vaccines altogether if they prove ineffective against variants. Right now it seems the EU, UK, and Israel have already acted, but we're adopting a wait and see approach. I wonder which side is going by "the science."
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 26, 2021, 10:17:16 AM
"Science" evolves, changes as knowledge expands, Peter.
But you are mixing that truth with the clear idiocies of those with wacko conspiracy theories, Internet-espoused "remedies," and denial of what are basic facts - the effectiveness of the vaccine, the number of deaths, the difference between infections and the deadly aspect of the virus, the politicizing of every mitigation.
So some little kids might be traumatized or miss out on some school lessons because of the shutdown? Parents, wake up and deal with the trauma. Schools, find ways to make it up. It's better than spreading the illness. And if the shutdown was unnecessary, so what?
So businesses suffer because of vaccine requirement? Well, you can't sell food without meeting health standards, so businesses will just have to adapt.
And as for the Evil Of All Evils - that is, "the government is over-reaching and telling me to do something I don't want to do" - grow up. I don't want to wear a seat belt or have to take a test to drive a car.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 10:45:20 AM
"Science" evolves, changes as knowledge expands, Peter.
But you are mixing that truth with the clear idiocies of those with wacko conspiracy theories, Internet-espoused "remedies," and denial of what are basic facts - the effectiveness of the vaccine, the number of deaths, the difference between infections and the deadly aspect of the virus, the politicizing of every mitigation.
So some little kids might be traumatized or miss out on some school lessons because of the shutdown? Parents, wake up and deal with the trauma. Schools, find ways to make it up. It's better than spreading the illness. And if the shutdown was unnecessary, so what?
So businesses suffer because of vaccine requirement? Well, you can't sell food without meeting health standards, so businesses will just have to adapt.
And as for the Evil Of All Evils - that is, "the government is over-reaching and telling me to do something I don't want to do" - grow up. I don't want to wear a seat belt or have to take a test to drive a car.
To the bolded part, no, it isn't better. That isn't a matter of data or science, that is a philosophical difference. I would much rather fewer children be traumatized and fewer businesses be bankrupted than fewer people get Covid. I think everyone will eventually get Covid regardless of their immunization status, and trying to outrun it or hide from it is a mistake. 

As for you admonition to parents and businesses, charming as ever, and quite typical of progressives. But I think parents are already waking up and doing something about it. They're voting in better school boards, for one, or abandoning public schools in droves for two.     
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 26, 2021, 11:00:38 AM
Am I clear on this? You would rather people get Covid than have businesses shut down? You would rather have people get Covid than go through the difficulties of schools being closed? Did I get that right?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: D. Engebretson on November 26, 2021, 11:21:54 AM
This all brings up an interesting situation.  Is it possible that we will all end up with some version/variation of COVID at some point? It seems to mutate again and again. They have found a mutated strain in South Africa that our vaccines may not even offer protection from, but it's way too soon to tell. I think it's now clear that most people will end up with some relatively mild reaction from exposure to some form of the COVID virus.  As with even the seasonal flu it will be much more severe for others.  The hope in the beginning was that we would largely eradicate the virus.  But that's not going to happen. Repeated outbreaks keep occurring both in this country and around the world. So the question is: What do we ultimately hope to accomplish with extreme measures?  Postponement of the inevitable? And I am not here arguing against vaccines and other usual mitigating measures.  I'm talking about how we reacted last spring.  Total lock downs, schools going completely remote, etc.

We will have to learn to live with this virus.  But I think Peter is right: "trying to outrun it or hide from it is a mistake."
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 11:27:10 AM
Am I clear on this? You would rather people get Covid than have businesses shut down? You would rather have people get Covid than go through the difficulties of schools being closed? Did I get that right?
Yes. The spread of the disease it not good, but it is going to happen and in the vast majority of cases does no harm. The key to mitigation is to flatten the curve so not everybody gets it at once, not to avoid it altogether, unless you are highly vulnerable and need to limit all contact. You can pooh-pooh the trauma being done to children all you want and treat the livelihoods being lost with sarcastic derision until the cows come home, but fewer and fewer people are going to stop living their lives so that you can feel a tad safer. Yes, we wear seatbelts, but we don't stop driving cars. We drive even though we know that doing so risks fatal accidents to ourselves and others that wouldn't happen if everyone stayed home. We'd rather live our lives with some risk than not live our lives, which is why normal people still drive places. And still go to work. And send the kids to school. And hold church services. The idea that nothing could be worse than the risk caused by the potential of spreading of the disease makes no sense to me. But you do you. 

You wrote: So some little kids might be traumatized or miss out on some school lessons because of the shutdown? Parents, wake up and deal with the trauma. Schools, find ways to make it up. It's better than spreading the illness. And if the shutdown was unnecessary, so what?
So businesses suffer because of vaccine requirement? Well, you can't sell food without meeting health standards, so businesses will just have to adapt.
And as for the Evil Of All Evils - that is, "the government is over-reaching and telling me to do something I don't want to do" - grow up. 
I find that sentiment and reasoning wrongheaded and the attitude obscene. Think what you like. Many of us think differently and are going to act on our own values, not yours.   
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 26, 2021, 11:45:53 AM
For heaven sake’s, Mr. Rustad. I’m not speaking to any of those people here. Furthermore, I’m not trying to convince them of anything. Most of the time, arguing with a fool, while it can be amusing, doesn’t change anyone’s mind.
And I stick with my previous conclusion. Someone links up for a movement or follows a person on one item, and after a time that person is “all in” and has a cultist’s warped sense of “right” or “truth” or “loyalty.” I’m not saying that has happened to everyone here. I’m just saying that certain things can take hold of an otherwise “wise“ being.

When you call people a fool or cultist in person, you reach a very limited audience.

When you call people fools or cultists here, you reach a larger audience.

You say that you're "not speaking to any of those people here".  How do you know that?

Keep calling people fools and cultists if you want, but own it.  I just hope that "those people" read enough of your screeds to realize just how little credence they should give them.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 26, 2021, 11:48:09 AM
In case I haven’t already made it clear, I don’t believe in screaming at individuals, yelling “you’re a fool! You’re selfish! You don’t care about others!“
I’m all for gentle persuasion. I’m also for society as a whole making that persuasion as effective as possible, and sometimes that means leaving the gentle part behind.
Repeat: you won’t hear me yelling at individuals. But you will hear me talking about the various segments of our population that refuse the vaccine, spread erroneous information about the vaccine, and otherwise impede the expansion of the protection the vaccine certainly provides.

And yet you continue to ridicule those who disagree with you.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dan Fienen on November 26, 2021, 11:55:06 AM
Am I clear on this? You would rather people get Covid than have businesses shut down? You would rather have people get Covid than go through the difficulties of schools being closed? Did I get that right?
As in much else in life, it is a question of cost/benefit. You downplay the costs of the kinds of mitigation efforts that you recommend as though shutting down businesses, schools, churches were minor inconveniences, easily compensated for. That is like calling the burning down of a police precinct building in a riot throwing a few rocks at a window. Talk to parents who have seen the deleterious effects on their children that the school closures brought. Oh wait, you don't talk to people because they might carry Covid.


Over 38,000 people died in traffic accidents during 2020. Many of those deaths could have been prevented if there were a national 30 mph speed limit on all roads and highways. Wouldn't it be worth it to have everybody slow down to 30 mph if it would save lives?


Climate change is a major concern. One contributor to climate change is travel. If it would help mitigate climate change, would it be worth it to ban all nonessential airplane travel if it would help with climate change, especially banning overseas air travel for vacation or pleasure? A major contributor to greenhouse gasses is the manufacture of cement, it accounts for between 5% and 8% of world-wide CO2 emissions.  Perhaps we should ban the manufacture of cement (and thus concrete) to save the planet. While we are about it, automobiles are a major contributor. Ban personal automobiles?


At what point do we end up destroying lives to save them?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 12:15:56 PM
You can’t say it is foolish in any particular circumstance unless you know the pros and cons and the values of the person involved. If someone you know to be wise makes a deliberate, considered decision that you think foolish, that should give you pause. Maybe the decision isn’t foolish. And even if you maintain your position that he decided wrongly, you should at least now know that reasonable people can disagree simply because you’ve seen it happen. Not everyone is in the same position or values the same things or fears the same things.

Take a grocery store clerk in spring of 2020. Should they continue working or stay home? Certainly staying home reduced the risk of getting or transmitting Covid. But working in the store also served the neighbor and possibly fulfilled central vocations by providing for a family. People might make either choice in all wisdom and faithfulness depending upon their circumstances and assessment of the pros and cons. Why not let people make their own choices given that only they know all the factors weighing into their decisions? That is especially true of someone’s most personal and intimate health decisions. Unless they’re deliberately harming someone, they should make their own choices.


I know that the unvaccinated are more likely to be infected, suffer greater symptoms, more likely to be hospitalized, more likely to die, and more likely to infect others than those who are vaccinated. Unless the unvaccinated have no contact with any other person, they are putting others at risk, not just possibly harming themselves.


I'm still waiting to hear an argument how refusing to be vaccinated is an act of loving one's neighbor. It's clear to me that being vaccinated is an act of loving self and neighbor. I'm willing to listen to biblical arguments that support refusing to be vaccinated.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 12:18:16 PM
You can’t say it is foolish in any particular circumstance unless you know the pros and cons and the values of the person involved. If someone you know to be wise makes a deliberate, considered decision that you think foolish, that should give you pause. Maybe the decision isn’t foolish. And even if you maintain your position that he decided wrongly, you should at least now know that reasonable people can disagree simply because you’ve seen it happen. Not everyone is in the same position or values the same things or fears the same things.

Take a grocery store clerk in spring of 2020. Should they continue working or stay home? Certainly staying home reduced the risk of getting or transmitting Covid. But working in the store also served the neighbor and possibly fulfilled central vocations by providing for a family. People might make either choice in all wisdom and faithfulness depending upon their circumstances and assessment of the pros and cons. Why not let people make their own choices given that only they know all the factors weighing into their decisions? That is especially true of someone’s most personal and intimate health decisions. Unless they’re deliberately harming someone, they should make their own choices.


I know that the unvaccinated are more likely to be infected, suffer greater symptoms, more likely to be hospitalized, more likely to die, and more likely to infect others than those who are vaccinated. Unless the unvaccinated have no contact with any other person, they are putting others at risk, not just possibly harming themselves.


I'm still waiting to hear an argument how refusing to be vaccinated is an act of loving one's neighbor. It's clear to me that being vaccinated is an act of loving self and neighbor. I'm willing to listen to biblical arguments that support refusing to be vaccinated.

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 12:23:16 PM
This all brings up an interesting situation.  Is it possible that we will all end up with some version/variation of COVID at some point? It seems to mutate again and again. They have found a mutated strain in South Africa that our vaccines may not even offer protection from, but it's way too soon to tell. I think it's now clear that most people will end up with some relatively mild reaction from exposure to some form of the COVID virus.  As with even the seasonal flu it will be much more severe for others.  The hope in the beginning was that we would largely eradicate the virus.  But that's not going to happen. Repeated outbreaks keep occurring both in this country and around the world. So the question is: What do we ultimately hope to accomplish with extreme measures?  Postponement of the inevitable? And I am not here arguing against vaccines and other usual mitigating measures.  I'm talking about how we reacted last spring.  Total lock downs, schools going completely remote, etc.

We will have to learn to live with this virus.  But I think Peter is right: "trying to outrun it or hide from it is a mistake."


I'm certain that the hope is that COVID, like 14 other diseases will be eradicated by vaccines.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/parents/diseases/forgot-14-diseases.html


For those not taking the time to click on the link, the 14 listed are:
Polio
Tetanus
Flu
Hepatitis B
Hepatitis A
Rubella
Hib
Measles
Whooping Cough
Rotavirus
Mumps
Chickenpox
Diphtheria
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 12:25:37 PM
You can’t say it is foolish in any particular circumstance unless you know the pros and cons and the values of the person involved. If someone you know to be wise makes a deliberate, considered decision that you think foolish, that should give you pause. Maybe the decision isn’t foolish. And even if you maintain your position that he decided wrongly, you should at least now know that reasonable people can disagree simply because you’ve seen it happen. Not everyone is in the same position or values the same things or fears the same things.

Take a grocery store clerk in spring of 2020. Should they continue working or stay home? Certainly staying home reduced the risk of getting or transmitting Covid. But working in the store also served the neighbor and possibly fulfilled central vocations by providing for a family. People might make either choice in all wisdom and faithfulness depending upon their circumstances and assessment of the pros and cons. Why not let people make their own choices given that only they know all the factors weighing into their decisions? That is especially true of someone’s most personal and intimate health decisions. Unless they’re deliberately harming someone, they should make their own choices.


I know that the unvaccinated are more likely to be infected, suffer greater symptoms, more likely to be hospitalized, more likely to die, and more likely to infect others than those who are vaccinated. Unless the unvaccinated have no contact with any other person, they are putting others at risk, not just possibly harming themselves.


I'm still waiting to hear an argument how refusing to be vaccinated is an act of loving one's neighbor. It's clear to me that being vaccinated is an act of loving self and neighbor. I'm willing to listen to biblical arguments that support refusing to be vaccinated.

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.


The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.


Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 12:28:45 PM
The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.

That judgment is also noted.

Quote
Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.

I am now being lazy and assuming when people cannot think of any justification for something millions of their neighbors are doing, such a person is not, in fact, interested in hearing other views, but rather in sniffing their own farts.  If you seriously cannot come up with an example of why someone refusing to get a vaccine is loving his neighbor, then you and your unjustifiably high opinion of your own opinions are the problem.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 12:29:33 PM
Am I clear on this? You would rather people get Covid than have businesses shut down? You would rather have people get Covid than go through the difficulties of schools being closed? Did I get that right?
Yes. The spread of the disease it not good, but it is going to happen and in the vast majority of cases does no harm. The key to mitigation is to flatten the curve so not everybody gets it at once, not to avoid it altogether, unless you are highly vulnerable and need to limit all contact. You can pooh-pooh the trauma being done to children all you want and treat the livelihoods being lost with sarcastic derision until the cows come home, but fewer and fewer people are going to stop living their lives so that you can feel a tad safer. Yes, we wear seatbelts, but we don't stop driving cars. We drive even though we know that doing so risks fatal accidents to ourselves and others that wouldn't happen if everyone stayed home. We'd rather live our lives with some risk than not live our lives, which is why normal people still drive places. And still go to work. And send the kids to school. And hold church services. The idea that nothing could be worse than the risk caused by the potential of spreading of the disease makes no sense to me. But you do you. 

You wrote: So some little kids might be traumatized or miss out on some school lessons because of the shutdown? Parents, wake up and deal with the trauma. Schools, find ways to make it up. It's better than spreading the illness. And if the shutdown was unnecessary, so what?
So businesses suffer because of vaccine requirement? Well, you can't sell food without meeting health standards, so businesses will just have to adapt.
And as for the Evil Of All Evils - that is, "the government is over-reaching and telling me to do something I don't want to do" - grow up. 
I find that sentiment and reasoning wrongheaded and the attitude obscene. Think what you like. Many of us think differently and are going to act on our own values, not yours.


To the boldface: that's precisely the basic problem, which is the original sin: Self-centeredness. Again I ask, how is the value of refusing the vaccination in line with the values God has given us through Jesus? Namely, how does it show love for self, neighbor, and God?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 12:36:04 PM
The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.

That judgment is also noted.

Quote
Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.

I am now being lazy and assuming when people cannot think of any justification for something millions of their neighbors are doing, such a person is not, in fact, interested in hearing other views, but rather in sniffing their own farts.  If you seriously cannot come up with an example of why someone refusing to get a vaccine is loving his neighbor, then you and your unjustifiably high opinion of your own opinions are the problem.


It is also my belief that it is much, much better to hear arguments directly from "the horse's mouth," than to make up my own about others. A friend, we just recently meant, came over for Thanksgiving dinner, (with a long-time friend). He was taught by his mother, growing up in Texas, that every other denomination except Baptists were cults. He came to question her argument when he attended Catholic masses in the military (because their service times were more convenient for him). Lutherans were also seen as a cult. I've also read articles by Lutherans that are anti-Catholic, which, when talking to Catholics, are untrue or at best, a mischaracterization of their beliefs. Similarly, a Catholic friend asked me about some Lutheran things that a priest had taught him about Lutheranism; and they were mischaracterizations.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 01:12:52 PM
I think we lost the plot as a society when the entire vaccine argument got framed around "personal choice" versus "civic duty."

(Do we really have any sense of civic duty anymore in this tribal, consumerist, and individualized society?)

For most of my life, vaccines were like taxes. They we not choices but requirements:

Want to attend school? Show your vaccination record.
Want to study abroad? Vaccines were required for a visa.
Want to complete CPE (a requirement to be ordained)? Hospital requires proof of vaccination.

And this was, for the most part, completely uncontroversial and understood. There was a fringe anti-vax movement (just like there is a fringe movement that considers all taxation to be theft). Some people cheated. There were a few, limited exceptions made (like religious exemptions from FICA, etc). But mostly, you did what was expected because it was expected and for the common good. If you want a civil society, everyone has to pay taxes to keep the roads plowed, the schools open, and the ambulances running. If you want a society relatively unburdened by lethal, highly transmissible viruses… well, roll up your arm and get a shot.

We've lost the plot though. We all want freedoms and choices without responsibilities. My state literally created a lottery to entice people to get vaxxed…. a shot at a million dollars… and we are begging and pleading and lobbying and persuading… and it makes me wonder… mandates are as old as the Republic… upheld by the Supreme Court… and anything Pfizer or Moderna puts in its product is safer and better researched and more hygienic than the small pox vaccinations required by one Gen. George Washington.

So I do not doubt that there are thoughtful people, with love for their neighbors, who have made a choice not to get vaccinated for reasons they consider to be logical. I bet the same would be true if filing a 1040 were also seen as a "personal choice." But to have any kind of society, we have to have civic duties along with civil liberties.

Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 01:20:35 PM
The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.

That judgment is also noted.

Quote
Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.

I am now being lazy and assuming when people cannot think of any justification for something millions of their neighbors are doing, such a person is not, in fact, interested in hearing other views, but rather in sniffing their own farts.  If you seriously cannot come up with an example of why someone refusing to get a vaccine is loving his neighbor, then you and your unjustifiably high opinion of your own opinions are the problem.


It is also my belief that it is much, much better to hear arguments directly from "the horse's mouth," than to make up my own about others. A friend, we just recently meant, came over for Thanksgiving dinner, (with a long-time friend). He was taught by his mother, growing up in Texas, that every other denomination except Baptists were cults. He came to question her argument when he attended Catholic masses in the military (because their service times were more convenient for him). Lutherans were also seen as a cult. I've also read articles by Lutherans that are anti-Catholic, which, when talking to Catholics, are untrue or at best, a mischaracterization of their beliefs. Similarly, a Catholic friend asked me about some Lutheran things that a priest had taught him about Lutheranism; and they were mischaracterizations.

Have you considered that you are the one accusing others of cultism here?  The problem is not that you are asking for arguments "from the horse's mouth," but rather that you render judgments without charity.

I'll give you one example, leaving some details out since this is a friend of mine and none of your business, to hopefully illustrate my point.  I know a man who works for a large corporation that is impacted by the vaccine mandates President Biden put into place earlier this year.  He has been told that he must be vaccinated or he will lose his job by year's end.  So this particular company, a government contractor, has gone beyond the mandate to essentially say "get vaccinated or else."  He was given the same justification the mandate does -- it's for "workplace safety."

He has a chronic disease that makes him concerned about the effects of the vaccine.  He's already had COVID, and therefore is not worried about immunity because he already has it.  But the real kicker is this -- he works from home.  That's right -- in the name of workplace safety, they are forcing a guy with chronic diseases who is at least as immune from reinfection as any vaccinated person to get a chemical injected in his body, to protect a workplace he never goes to.

You want to put the burden on him to demonstrate why his refusal to be vaccinated demonstrates love of God and neighbor.  But my question is to you -- why should he have to decide between feeding his family and getting a vaccine he doesn't need and which might harm him to placate your fears?  More to the point, why aren't you viewing HIM as your neighbor instead of viewing yourself as his? 

Worry about your duty to your neighbor, and leave my friend alone.  That's my response.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 01:21:40 PM
Am I clear on this? You would rather people get Covid than have businesses shut down? You would rather have people get Covid than go through the difficulties of schools being closed? Did I get that right?
Yes. The spread of the disease it not good, but it is going to happen and in the vast majority of cases does no harm. The key to mitigation is to flatten the curve so not everybody gets it at once, not to avoid it altogether, unless you are highly vulnerable and need to limit all contact. You can pooh-pooh the trauma being done to children all you want and treat the livelihoods being lost with sarcastic derision until the cows come home, but fewer and fewer people are going to stop living their lives so that you can feel a tad safer. Yes, we wear seatbelts, but we don't stop driving cars. We drive even though we know that doing so risks fatal accidents to ourselves and others that wouldn't happen if everyone stayed home. We'd rather live our lives with some risk than not live our lives, which is why normal people still drive places. And still go to work. And send the kids to school. And hold church services. The idea that nothing could be worse than the risk caused by the potential of spreading of the disease makes no sense to me. But you do you. 

You wrote: So some little kids might be traumatized or miss out on some school lessons because of the shutdown? Parents, wake up and deal with the trauma. Schools, find ways to make it up. It's better than spreading the illness. And if the shutdown was unnecessary, so what?
So businesses suffer because of vaccine requirement? Well, you can't sell food without meeting health standards, so businesses will just have to adapt.
And as for the Evil Of All Evils - that is, "the government is over-reaching and telling me to do something I don't want to do" - grow up. 
I find that sentiment and reasoning wrongheaded and the attitude obscene. Think what you like. Many of us think differently and are going to act on our own values, not yours.


To the boldface: that's precisely the basic problem, which is the original sin: Self-centeredness. Again I ask, how is the value of refusing the vaccination in line with the values God has given us through Jesus? Namely, how does it show love for self, neighbor, and God?
The topic was not about vaccines specifically but about shutdowns, which Charles claimed were no big deal. Parents should just fix childhood trauma. Businesses should just go out of business. It is that easy, and a small price to pay for making him feel safer.

So you're saying that loving your neighbor means living according to your neighbor's values rather than your own? Do you live your life according to my values? Or do you selfishly live according to your own values?

Linus from Peanuts famously claimed that he loved mankind, it was just people he couldn't stand. How is forcing someone who has already had the disease to get vaccinated against their will an act of loving them? It isn't. It is an act of objectifying them as a mere dangerous organism. People do that in the name of loving mankind in the abstract at the expense of actually loving any concrete, particular person. If grandma is vulnerable but desperately wants to see her granddaughter, her granddaughter might get vaccinated against her own preferences as an act of love toward grandma. And if Billy's mom is terrified of side effects and doesn't want him to get vaccinated, he might decide not to get vaccinated as an act of love toward his mother even though he personally doesn't think getting vaccinated is a problem. The point is that an act of love has a concrete object, not an abstract object.

Once you define a non-act as an act, you've argued at the level of assumptions. There are billions of things you haven't done today. How are any of them acts of loving your neighbor? Not shooting them, I guess. Not running them over with your car. But how is your refusal to buy an ice cream cone today an act of loving your neighbor? He might need the customers. You are being selfish by not patronizing his business. The whole line of reasoning goes astray from the start. Not doing something that your neighbor wants you to do is not necessarily unloving. Otherwise resisting peer pressure would always be a selfish, sinful act.

If someone deliberately tries to infect his neighbor that is unloving. If someone puts his neighbor at risk on purpose, that is unloving. But the people not getting vaccinated are not setting out to put their neighbor at risk any more than people going for a pleasure drive in the country (who are admittedly putting people in danger of death purely for their own enjoyment) are setting out to put their neighbor at risk.     
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 01:31:28 PM
The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.

That judgment is also noted.

Quote
Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.

I am now being lazy and assuming when people cannot think of any justification for something millions of their neighbors are doing, such a person is not, in fact, interested in hearing other views, but rather in sniffing their own farts.  If you seriously cannot come up with an example of why someone refusing to get a vaccine is loving his neighbor, then you and your unjustifiably high opinion of your own opinions are the problem.


It is also my belief that it is much, much better to hear arguments directly from "the horse's mouth," than to make up my own about others. A friend, we just recently meant, came over for Thanksgiving dinner, (with a long-time friend). He was taught by his mother, growing up in Texas, that every other denomination except Baptists were cults. He came to question her argument when he attended Catholic masses in the military (because their service times were more convenient for him). Lutherans were also seen as a cult. I've also read articles by Lutherans that are anti-Catholic, which, when talking to Catholics, are untrue or at best, a mischaracterization of their beliefs. Similarly, a Catholic friend asked me about some Lutheran things that a priest had taught him about Lutheranism; and they were mischaracterizations.

Have you considered that you are the one accusing others of cultism here?  The problem is not that you are asking for arguments "from the horse's mouth," but rather that you render judgments without charity.

I'll give you one example, leaving some details out since this is a friend of mine and none of your business, to hopefully illustrate my point.  I know a man who works for a large corporation that is impacted by the vaccine mandates President Biden put into place earlier this year.  He has been told that he must be vaccinated or he will lose his job by year's end.  So this particular company, a government contractor, has gone beyond the mandate to essentially say "get vaccinated or else."  He was given the same justification the mandate does -- it's for "workplace safety."

He has a chronic disease that makes him concerned about the effects of the vaccine.  He's already had COVID, and therefore is not worried about immunity because he already has it.  But the real kicker is this -- he works from home.  That's right -- in the name of workplace safety, they are forcing a guy with chronic diseases who is at least as immune from reinfection as any vaccinated person to get a chemical injected in his body, to protect a workplace he never goes to.

You want to put the burden on him to demonstrate why his refusal to be vaccinated demonstrates love of God and neighbor.  But my question is to you -- why should he have to decide between feeding his family and getting a vaccine he doesn't need and which might harm him to placate your fears?  More to the point, why aren't you viewing HIM as your neighbor instead of viewing yourself as his? 

Worry about your duty to your neighbor, and leave my friend alone.  That's my response.

I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 01:39:47 PM
Why did you think long and hard about it?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 02:11:40 PM
I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

Who are you to make that decision on his behalf?  Is it because you "thought long and hard about it?"  Do you think he didn't?  Do you think if perhaps he read your conclusory assertions here he would say "oh, gosh -- I hadn't considered that Dana Lockhart disagrees with me, perhaps I should submit to the vaccine after all!" 

I mean, you didn't even mention his health issues, but being entirely fair, it's not really any of your business what they are and so I haven't told you, which leaves you a little bit in the dark.  My point is, that doesn't seem to have stopped you from judging him and his choice.

Quote
As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.

The Court in Jacobson found that it was the right of a STATE to enact a vaccine mandate because the LEGISLATURE directly enacted the law within the state's police powers.  It did not say an unelected federal bureaucracy has the right to impose a mandate not contemplated by the enabling legislation, much less that private employers may go beyond it to compel employees to have chemicals injected into their bodies against their will.  Since nobody has said there is an "automatic right to refuse a vaccine," that seems to be a red herring to me.  The state legislature of Georgia has not imposed a vaccine mandate and this man's employer is basically forcing him to get one or be fired from his job, in the name of workplace safety for a workplace he does not attend.  You say above he will at some point go outside his house.  Well, obviously. What that has to do with workplace safety is beyond me, but you and Pastor Stoffregen seem eager to tell other people what to do under pain of starvation and financial ruin, so I suppose such details don't matter.

I ask again -- where did Christ teach you to starve your neighbor to make yourself feel safer?  Put the shoe on the other foot and justify your insistence that this man get injected against his will.  Until you do that, your entire worldview is unchristian and unbefitting a Christian.  I am vaccinated and I wish others to be vaccinated, but I'm not going to insist my friend get vaccinated over my irrational fears.  I trust that my vaccine works.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 02:17:04 PM
The latest science is always changing. That’s an argument for constantly changing what you do. But it is also a de facto argument against changing what you do until something shows some staying power. When someone changes their mind all the time, that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong or that you never listen to them. It just means you wait a bit to see if they’re going to stick with it this time. If two years from now it turns out there are long term negative side effects of one or more of the vaccines, people will no doubt point out that they didn’t know that at the time they were recommending them, and in fact had no way of knowing that. True. But they also didn’t know there weren’t adverse effects, and had every reason to think it was a possibility. If that happens, I won’t regret my decision to get vaccinated. I did what I thought best at the time. And people who didn’t get vaccinated will also not regret their decision. They were doing what they thought best at the time. Neither of us knew for certain which decision time would vindicate, and we both made our own decision. It is when you mandate or forbid an action that you invite trouble, because if time doesn’t vindicate you, you’ve become a tyrant. Tyrants tend to mean well.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 02:35:06 PM
I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

Who are you to make that decision on his behalf?  Is it because you "thought long and hard about it?"  Do you think he didn't?  Do you think if perhaps he read your conclusory assertions here he would say "oh, gosh -- I hadn't considered that Dana Lockhart disagrees with me, perhaps I should submit to the vaccine after all!" 

I mean, you didn't even mention his health issues, but being entirely fair, it's not really any of your business what they are and so I haven't told you, which leaves you a little bit in the dark.  My point is, that doesn't seem to have stopped you from judging him and his choice.

Quote
As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.

The Court in Jacobson found that it was the right of a STATE to enact a vaccine mandate because the LEGISLATURE directly enacted the law within the state's police powers.  It did not say an unelected federal bureaucracy has the right to impose a mandate not contemplated by the enabling legislation, much less that private employers may go beyond it to compel employees to have chemicals injected into their bodies against their will.  Since nobody has said there is an "automatic right to refuse a vaccine," that seems to be a red herring to me.  The state legislature of Georgia has not imposed a vaccine mandate and this man's employer is basically forcing him to get one or be fired from his job, in the name of workplace safety for a workplace he does not attend.  You say above he will at some point go outside his house.  Well, obviously. What that has to do with workplace safety is beyond me, but you and Pastor Stoffregen seem eager to tell other people what to do under pain of starvation and financial ruin, so I suppose such details don't matter.

I ask again -- where did Christ teach you to starve your neighbor to make yourself feel safer?  Put the shoe on the other foot and justify your insistence that this man get injected against his will.  Until you do that, your entire worldview is unchristian and unbefitting a Christian.  I am vaccinated and I wish others to be vaccinated, but I'm not going to insist my friend get vaccinated over my irrational fears.  I trust that my vaccine works.

I have outlined my views of vaccination as a civic duty, akin to paying taxes, already in this thread. Framing it as a personal choice is a rhetorical ploy… I understand why it serves your views, I just don't think it represents the reality of the situation.

Has your friend been advised by his medical professional that getting vaccinated would imperil his health? If so, then there should be an exemption available to him.  But for the vast majority of people, vaccination should be a considered a duty of citizenship. Akin to taxes and jury duty and registering for the selective service and all other things we have to do as citizens, even (especially?) when we would prefer not to. As to the mandates: they will be litigated in the courts, but it is obvious as a matter of policy that the intention is to get as many people vaccinated as possible. Whether the courts will uphold the Biden's administration's preferred means is an open question. I was merely pointing out that, as a matter of law and policy, vaccines have long been considered compulsory rather than optional.

And our employers have the right to establish their own polices. There is no right to a job. I don't desire anyone to lose their job or face financial ruin… it just perplexes me that vaccines have long been a condition of employment for millions of people, that this has been uncontroversial, and it just happens to be THIS vaccine that people are digging their heels in about. Ok. Dig your heels in. But you are not being any more persecuted if your employer fires you for doing so than if you are dismissed for not following through with any other job requirement.

Look: it's clear it doesn't matter who says that "natural immunity" is not equivalent to vaccination, as you have already rejected it out of hand. Things were less clear 8 months ago when I signed up to get jabbed… science does take time… but the picture is much clearer now, which is why previous infection is not considered by any health authority as equivalent to vaccination. So it's not "Dana Lockhart disagrees with me," but rather "just about every public health authority in the nation looked at this question and came to a different conclusion." But hey, what do they know?

Screaming, "but I don't wanna do it" is petulant. It's childish. It's anti-social. Pay your taxes, show up for jury duty, and get your shots. It's not hard.






Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 02:40:25 PM
The latest science is always changing. That’s an argument for constantly changing what you do. But it is also a de facto argument against changing what you do until something shows some staying power. When someone changes their mind all the time, that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong or that you never listen to them. It just means you wait a bit to see if they’re going to stick with it this time. If two years from now it turns out there are long term negative side effects of one or more of the vaccines, people will no doubt point out that they didn’t know that at the time they were recommending them, and in fact had no way of knowing that. True. But they also didn’t know there weren’t adverse effects, and had every reason to think it was a possibility. If that happens, I won’t regret my decision to get vaccinated. I did what I thought best at the time. And people who didn’t get vaccinated will also not regret their decision. They were doing what they thought best at the time. Neither of us knew for certain which decision time would vindicate, and we both made our own decision. It is when you mandate or forbid an action that you invite trouble, because if time doesn’t vindicate you, you’ve become a tyrant. Tyrants tend to mean well.

I think it is pretty well documented that plenty of people do regret not getting vaccinated… when they end up being ventilated and dying in the ICU. 1000+ deaths a day, gentlemen . The overwhelming majority unvaccinated. Including a relative of mine. Sadly.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 03:01:04 PM
The latest science is always changing. That’s an argument for constantly changing what you do. But it is also a de facto argument against changing what you do until something shows some staying power. When someone changes their mind all the time, that doesn’t mean they’re always wrong or that you never listen to them. It just means you wait a bit to see if they’re going to stick with it this time. If two years from now it turns out there are long term negative side effects of one or more of the vaccines, people will no doubt point out that they didn’t know that at the time they were recommending them, and in fact had no way of knowing that. True. But they also didn’t know there weren’t adverse effects, and had every reason to think it was a possibility. If that happens, I won’t regret my decision to get vaccinated. I did what I thought best at the time. And people who didn’t get vaccinated will also not regret their decision. They were doing what they thought best at the time. Neither of us knew for certain which decision time would vindicate, and we both made our own decision. It is when you mandate or forbid an action that you invite trouble, because if time doesn’t vindicate you, you’ve become a tyrant. Tyrants tend to mean well.

I think it is pretty well documented that plenty of people do regret not getting vaccinated… when they end up being ventilated and dying in the ICU. 1000+ deaths a day, gentlemen . The overwhelming majority unvaccinated. Including a relative of mine. Sadly.
Could be. But at least it is their own decision they’re regretting. If the state had forbidden them when they wanted to get vaccinated, their regrets would be of an entirely different nature. And if in a few years it turns out there were serious adverse long term affects, and healthy people with little to fear from the virus have suffered irreversible consequences from the vaccine, maybe I’ll regret getting vaccinated. At least it will have been my decision I’m regretting. I knew there could be unforeseeable effects. It was a risk I was willing to take. I just see no need to insist that everyone else evaluate risks the same way.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 03:17:49 PM
Why did you think long and hard about it?

Honestly? Because at the time being a member of the clergy bumped me to the front of the line for vaccines at a time when others were waiting, and I had to weigh the value of my supposed "natural immunity" and the possibility of taking a spot from someone who hadn't had covid. The public health advice, however, was unequivocal: get the vaccine as soon as you are eligible.

One question for the other pastors on this thread: how often do you talk with, hear from, meet with etc. your local public health department? I have found them tremendously helpful and receptive since day one. If it all comes down to trust, well, I frankly have a high degree of trust for my local department and take what they say seriously. And stay in communication.

Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dave Benke on November 26, 2021, 03:20:43 PM
There are serious adverse long term effects, without any question, for the many who have contracted what is called Long COVID.  They're not afraid of what might happen long term.  It has happened to them.  And they have been the most effective folks in communicating to our neighborhood and parish that it's important to get the vaccine.

My nephew is a physician who contracted the virus in the very first wave because there was no PPE.  He told us what was happening in his hospital, that there were no masks available, and that he would be getting the virus.  He did, in a severe way.  In addition to his hospitalist duties, he is also doing community service in Westchester County NY educating adults and children concerning Corona Virus as an attending physician at a major hospital with the added differential of his personal experience.  Along with congregation members who are in the public health department, and along with the visits to our church and day care center by people in the public health department, we have family in the public health division.  All of these are invaluable in parish and personal practice.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: John_Hannah on November 26, 2021, 03:21:06 PM
I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

Who are you to make that decision on his behalf?  Is it because you "thought long and hard about it?"  Do you think he didn't?  Do you think if perhaps he read your conclusory assertions here he would say "oh, gosh -- I hadn't considered that Dana Lockhart disagrees with me, perhaps I should submit to the vaccine after all!" 

I mean, you didn't even mention his health issues, but being entirely fair, it's not really any of your business what they are and so I haven't told you, which leaves you a little bit in the dark.  My point is, that doesn't seem to have stopped you from judging him and his choice.

Quote
As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.

The Court in Jacobson found that it was the right of a STATE to enact a vaccine mandate because the LEGISLATURE directly enacted the law within the state's police powers.  It did not say an unelected federal bureaucracy has the right to impose a mandate not contemplated by the enabling legislation, much less that private employers may go beyond it to compel employees to have chemicals injected into their bodies against their will.  Since nobody has said there is an "automatic right to refuse a vaccine," that seems to be a red herring to me.  The state legislature of Georgia has not imposed a vaccine mandate and this man's employer is basically forcing him to get one or be fired from his job, in the name of workplace safety for a workplace he does not attend.  You say above he will at some point go outside his house.  Well, obviously. What that has to do with workplace safety is beyond me, but you and Pastor Stoffregen seem eager to tell other people what to do under pain of starvation and financial ruin, so I suppose such details don't matter.

I ask again -- where did Christ teach you to starve your neighbor to make yourself feel safer?  Put the shoe on the other foot and justify your insistence that this man get injected against his will.  Until you do that, your entire worldview is unchristian and unbefitting a Christian.  I am vaccinated and I wish others to be vaccinated, but I'm not going to insist my friend get vaccinated over my irrational fears.  I trust that my vaccine works.

I have outlined my views of vaccination as a civic duty, akin to paying taxes, already in this thread. Framing it as a personal choice is a rhetorical ploy… I understand why it serves your views, I just don't think it represents the reality of the situation.

Has your friend been advised by his medical professional that getting vaccinated would imperil his health? If so, then there should be an exemption available to him.  But for the vast majority of people, vaccination should be a considered a duty of citizenship. Akin to taxes and jury duty and registering for the selective service and all other things we have to do as citizens, even (especially?) when we would prefer not to. As to the mandates: they will be litigated in the courts, but it is obvious as a matter of policy that the intention is to get as many people vaccinated as possible. Whether the courts will uphold the Biden's administration's preferred means is an open question. I was merely pointing out that, as a matter of law and policy, vaccines have long been considered compulsory rather than optional.

And our employers have the right to establish their own polices. There is no right to a job. I don't desire anyone to lose their job or face financial ruin… it just perplexes me that vaccines have long been a condition of employment for millions of people, that this has been uncontroversial, and it just happens to be THIS vaccine that people are digging their heels in about. Ok. Dig your heels in. But you are not being any more persecuted if your employer fires you for doing so than if you are dismissed for not following through with any other job requirement.

Look: it's clear it doesn't matter who says that "natural immunity" is not equivalent to vaccination, as you have already rejected it out of hand. Things were less clear 8 months ago when I signed up to get jabbed… science does take time… but the picture is much clearer now, which is why previous infection is not considered by any health authority as equivalent to vaccination. So it's not "Dana Lockhart disagrees with me," but rather "just about every public health authority in the nation looked at this question and came to a different conclusion." But hey, what do they know?

Screaming, "but I don't wanna do it" is petulant. It's childish. It's anti-social. Pay your taxes, show up for jury duty, and get your shots. It's not hard.

Anti-vaxing serves to discredit Biden and the Democrats. For many that seems to be what it's all about. Vote against Biden three years early.

You are right. Cooperate now for the public's health and vote your choices with your ballot when the time comes.

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 03:36:12 PM
I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

Who are you to make that decision on his behalf?  Is it because you "thought long and hard about it?"  Do you think he didn't?  Do you think if perhaps he read your conclusory assertions here he would say "oh, gosh -- I hadn't considered that Dana Lockhart disagrees with me, perhaps I should submit to the vaccine after all!" 

I mean, you didn't even mention his health issues, but being entirely fair, it's not really any of your business what they are and so I haven't told you, which leaves you a little bit in the dark.  My point is, that doesn't seem to have stopped you from judging him and his choice.

Quote
As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.

The Court in Jacobson found that it was the right of a STATE to enact a vaccine mandate because the LEGISLATURE directly enacted the law within the state's police powers.  It did not say an unelected federal bureaucracy has the right to impose a mandate not contemplated by the enabling legislation, much less that private employers may go beyond it to compel employees to have chemicals injected into their bodies against their will.  Since nobody has said there is an "automatic right to refuse a vaccine," that seems to be a red herring to me.  The state legislature of Georgia has not imposed a vaccine mandate and this man's employer is basically forcing him to get one or be fired from his job, in the name of workplace safety for a workplace he does not attend.  You say above he will at some point go outside his house.  Well, obviously. What that has to do with workplace safety is beyond me, but you and Pastor Stoffregen seem eager to tell other people what to do under pain of starvation and financial ruin, so I suppose such details don't matter.

I ask again -- where did Christ teach you to starve your neighbor to make yourself feel safer?  Put the shoe on the other foot and justify your insistence that this man get injected against his will.  Until you do that, your entire worldview is unchristian and unbefitting a Christian.  I am vaccinated and I wish others to be vaccinated, but I'm not going to insist my friend get vaccinated over my irrational fears.  I trust that my vaccine works.

I have outlined my views of vaccination as a civic duty, akin to paying taxes, already in this thread. Framing it as a personal choice is a rhetorical ploy… I understand why it serves your views, I just don't think it represents the reality of the situation.

Has your friend been advised by his medical professional that getting vaccinated would imperil his health? If so, then there should be an exemption available to him.  But for the vast majority of people, vaccination should be a considered a duty of citizenship. Akin to taxes and jury duty and registering for the selective service and all other things we have to do as citizens, even (especially?) when we would prefer not to. As to the mandates: they will be litigated in the courts, but it is obvious as a matter of policy that the intention is to get as many people vaccinated as possible. Whether the courts will uphold the Biden's administration's preferred means is an open question. I was merely pointing out that, as a matter of law and policy, vaccines have long been considered compulsory rather than optional.

And our employers have the right to establish their own polices. There is no right to a job. I don't desire anyone to lose their job or face financial ruin… it just perplexes me that vaccines have long been a condition of employment for millions of people, that this has been uncontroversial, and it just happens to be THIS vaccine that people are digging their heels in about. Ok. Dig your heels in. But you are not being any more persecuted if your employer fires you for doing so than if you are dismissed for not following through with any other job requirement.

Look: it's clear it doesn't matter who says that "natural immunity" is not equivalent to vaccination, as you have already rejected it out of hand. Things were less clear 8 months ago when I signed up to get jabbed… science does take time… but the picture is much clearer now, which is why previous infection is not considered by any health authority as equivalent to vaccination. So it's not "Dana Lockhart disagrees with me," but rather "just about every public health authority in the nation looked at this question and came to a different conclusion." But hey, what do they know?

Screaming, "but I don't wanna do it" is petulant. It's childish. It's anti-social. Pay your taxes, show up for jury duty, and get your shots. It's not hard.

The beautiful thing about living in a free country is literally no one has to care what your view of vaccine mandates is, or what you think is childish or anti-social.  No one has to agree with your view of who is or is not a public health expert.  No one has to care that you falsely accuse your neighbor of using a "rhetorical ploy" by "framing" vaccination as a personal choice, as if people are being dishonest.

No one has to care.  And I don't.  Your judgments are noted.  Ugly as they are, you are entitled to them.  My judgments are different.  I think you and Pastor Stoffregen and those like you are the unchristian ones because you seek to compel your neighbor to act to dispel your own fears.  You don't have to care about that either, because we live in a free country where I am free to get vaccinated and encourage my entire family to do so, and encourage my friends to do so, while still respecting the rights -- and the privacy, so I will decline your prying questions about his medical issues -- of this particular friend and those similarly situated.  And you all are free to call your neighbor names and accuse me and him and those like me and him of dishonesty.

Despite what Pastor Hannah seems to think......

Anti-vaxing serves to discredit Biden and the Democrats. For many that seems to be what it's all about. Vote against Biden three years early.

You are right. Cooperate now for the public's health and vote your choices with your ballot when the time comes.

.....accusing your neighbor of making this about politics and attempting to force their compliance is uncharitable and slanderous.  None of you give your neighbor the slightest benefit of any doubt.  You are all therefore liars and ought to repent.  But beyond that you are fools who think insulting people will get them to agree with you.  That is, you are not only uncharitable and slanderous and therefore wrong, but in fact you are also ineffective and chase people from your own cause.  That is true whether your cause is to help more people decide to get vaccinated or to simply control them.  The result is the same -- you make people not like you very much because you boss them around and turn up your elitist noses to avoid the stench of those who are beneath you.  You should all repent.

You won't, because you still think you are the ones to whom Christian duty is owed and my friend is the one being a bad Christian.  But you should. It's easy to think of one's self as the good samaritan while ignoring that you are the ones leaving Jesus bleeding in the ditch. 
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 26, 2021, 03:47:50 PM
Peter writes::
The topic was not about vaccines specifically but about shutdowns, which Charles claimed were no big deal. Parents should just fix childhood trauma. Businesses should just go out of business. It is that easy, and a small price to pay for making him feel safer.

I comment:
I did not say it was no big deal. I did say that parents have to deal with what their children face no matter what it is that the children are facing. Life, death, pandemic. These years facing that is part of parenting.
And I did not say that businesses should “just“ go out of business. They need to adapt. And we as a society need to do what needs to be done to help them. This was done, through – OMG! No! – Government relief action. That’s another way we help our neighbors. My son was laid off early on. The aid the government provided was invaluable in helping him to get through the last two years and plan for the future. Without the additional unemployment benefits and extending unemployment he and millions of others would have been in very dire straits.
This is not to “make me feel safer,” Peter, and for you to say that is a personal insult.
As noted somewhere upstream, these efforts to mitigate the impact of the pandemic are those drawn up by our best public health experts. Our best. Not people with no knowledge of medicine, epidemics, or public health. Furthermore, these are people whose jobs it is to protect public health. We pay them to do that. You can find others, and you can dismiss our paid experts (and the researchers and doctors who advise them) if you wish. But I think that would be a foolish thing to do.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 03:52:06 PM
I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity." Covid re-infections are real. Many people with long covid have experienced symptom relief after getting vaccinated. Based on the evidence we have, not exempting people previously diagnosed with covid from vaccine mandates is perfectly logical. They are not equivalent levels of protection. And presumably your friend leaves the house at some point, even if it is not going to the office, so a vaccine mandate is in the government and his company's best interest.

Who are you to make that decision on his behalf?  Is it because you "thought long and hard about it?"  Do you think he didn't?  Do you think if perhaps he read your conclusory assertions here he would say "oh, gosh -- I hadn't considered that Dana Lockhart disagrees with me, perhaps I should submit to the vaccine after all!" 

I mean, you didn't even mention his health issues, but being entirely fair, it's not really any of your business what they are and so I haven't told you, which leaves you a little bit in the dark.  My point is, that doesn't seem to have stopped you from judging him and his choice.

Quote
As the Supreme Court found in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, compulsory vaccine mandates are constitutional. That does not mean they are good policy, and there is a question over who has the power to enact them (states vs the federal government). But there is no automatic right to refuse a vaccine.

The Court in Jacobson found that it was the right of a STATE to enact a vaccine mandate because the LEGISLATURE directly enacted the law within the state's police powers.  It did not say an unelected federal bureaucracy has the right to impose a mandate not contemplated by the enabling legislation, much less that private employers may go beyond it to compel employees to have chemicals injected into their bodies against their will.  Since nobody has said there is an "automatic right to refuse a vaccine," that seems to be a red herring to me.  The state legislature of Georgia has not imposed a vaccine mandate and this man's employer is basically forcing him to get one or be fired from his job, in the name of workplace safety for a workplace he does not attend.  You say above he will at some point go outside his house.  Well, obviously. What that has to do with workplace safety is beyond me, but you and Pastor Stoffregen seem eager to tell other people what to do under pain of starvation and financial ruin, so I suppose such details don't matter.

I ask again -- where did Christ teach you to starve your neighbor to make yourself feel safer?  Put the shoe on the other foot and justify your insistence that this man get injected against his will.  Until you do that, your entire worldview is unchristian and unbefitting a Christian.  I am vaccinated and I wish others to be vaccinated, but I'm not going to insist my friend get vaccinated over my irrational fears.  I trust that my vaccine works.

I have outlined my views of vaccination as a civic duty, akin to paying taxes, already in this thread. Framing it as a personal choice is a rhetorical ploy… I understand why it serves your views, I just don't think it represents the reality of the situation.

Has your friend been advised by his medical professional that getting vaccinated would imperil his health? If so, then there should be an exemption available to him.  But for the vast majority of people, vaccination should be a considered a duty of citizenship. Akin to taxes and jury duty and registering for the selective service and all other things we have to do as citizens, even (especially?) when we would prefer not to. As to the mandates: they will be litigated in the courts, but it is obvious as a matter of policy that the intention is to get as many people vaccinated as possible. Whether the courts will uphold the Biden's administration's preferred means is an open question. I was merely pointing out that, as a matter of law and policy, vaccines have long been considered compulsory rather than optional.

And our employers have the right to establish their own polices. There is no right to a job. I don't desire anyone to lose their job or face financial ruin… it just perplexes me that vaccines have long been a condition of employment for millions of people, that this has been uncontroversial, and it just happens to be THIS vaccine that people are digging their heels in about. Ok. Dig your heels in. But you are not being any more persecuted if your employer fires you for doing so than if you are dismissed for not following through with any other job requirement.

Look: it's clear it doesn't matter who says that "natural immunity" is not equivalent to vaccination, as you have already rejected it out of hand. Things were less clear 8 months ago when I signed up to get jabbed… science does take time… but the picture is much clearer now, which is why previous infection is not considered by any health authority as equivalent to vaccination. So it's not "Dana Lockhart disagrees with me," but rather "just about every public health authority in the nation looked at this question and came to a different conclusion." But hey, what do they know?

Screaming, "but I don't wanna do it" is petulant. It's childish. It's anti-social. Pay your taxes, show up for jury duty, and get your shots. It's not hard.

The beautiful thing about living in a free country is literally no one has to care what your view of vaccine mandates is, or what you think is childish or anti-social.  No one has to agree with your view of who is or is not a public health expert.  No one has to care that you falsely accuse your neighbor of using a "rhetorical ploy" by "framing" vaccination as a personal choice, as if people are being dishonest.

No one has to care.  And I don't.  Your judgments are noted.  Ugly as they are, you are entitled to them.  My judgments are different.  I think you and Pastor Stoffregen and those like you are the unchristian ones because you seek to compel your neighbor to act to dispel your own fears.  You don't have to care about that either, because we live in a free country where I am free to get vaccinated and encourage my entire family to do so, and encourage my friends to do so, while still respecting the rights -- and the privacy, so I will decline your prying questions about his medical issues -- of this particular friend and those similarly situated.  And you all are free to call your neighbor names and accuse me and him and those like me and him of dishonesty.

Despite what Pastor Hannah seems to think......

Anti-vaxing serves to discredit Biden and the Democrats. For many that seems to be what it's all about. Vote against Biden three years early.

You are right. Cooperate now for the public's health and vote your choices with your ballot when the time comes.

.....accusing your neighbor of making this about politics and attempting to force their compliance is uncharitable and slanderous.  None of you give your neighbor the slightest benefit of any doubt.  You are all therefore liars and ought to repent.  But beyond that you are fools who think insulting people will get them to agree with you.  That is, you are not only uncharitable and slanderous and therefore wrong, but in fact you are also ineffective and chase people from your own cause.  That is true whether your cause is to help more people decide to get vaccinated or to simply control them.  The result is the same -- you make people not like you very much because you boss them around and turn up your elitist noses to avoid the stench of those who are beneath you.  You should all repent.

You won't, because you still think you are the ones to whom Christian duty is owed and my friend is the one being a bad Christian.  But you should. It's easy to think of one's self as the good samaritan while ignoring that you are the ones leaving Jesus bleeding in the ditch.

Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 03:59:41 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 04:18:21 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.

Against my better judgement…

Somewhat rare? Are you kidding? Ever registered a kid for daycare? School? Summer camp?

My daughter's pediatricians office gets so many requests for vaccination records it is literally "press 4" on the main menu of their phone tree. You press it, record your kid's name, and they mail it to you within 2 business days.

I have had to prove I was vaccinated at every stage of my life… school, high school, college, graduate school, seminary. For jobs. For volunteer positions. My mother just got a reminder from the local high school that my all juniors have to provide proof of meningitis vaccination, so she will have to prove my niece (who she is raising) got that vaccine.

I have friends who work for companies that REQUIRE the flu shot every year. As a condition of employment. No flu shot, no job.

And none of this has really ever been that controversial. It's just THIS vaccine that sets people off. Why?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 04:29:46 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.

Against my better judgement…

Somewhat rare? Are you kidding? Ever registered a kid for daycare? School? Summer camp?

My daughter's pediatricians office gets so many requests for vaccination records it is literally "press 4" on the main menu of their phone tree. You press it, record your kid's name, and they mail it to you within 2 business days.

I have had to prove I was vaccinated at every stage of my life… school, high school, college, graduate school, seminary. For jobs. For volunteer positions. My mother just got a reminder from the local high school that my all juniors have to provide proof of meningitis vaccination, so she will have to prove my niece (who she is raising) got that vaccine.

And none of this has really ever been that controversial. It's just THIS vaccine that sets people off. Why?

1)  You suck at ignoring people; and

2)  You persist in pretending others lack experience when in fact they merely disagree with you.  I've spoken on this very forum about registering my daughter for college, and though we did not have to request exemptions because she had every vaccine they required (and she also had the COVID-19 vaccine, which they do not), the exemptions were really easy to get.

Which job have you ever held that required you to show proof of vaccination?  Because I've literally never had that happen, and I've worked at a wide variety of places.  Was it a private job?  Did you work from home exclusively?  Could you demonstrate immunity to the disease (when my daughter registered for college, she had to show proof of a chicken pox vaccine OR proof of the disease)? 

Etc.  People other than you have thought this through.  You aren't the only one who has considered these matters.  You aren't the smartest guy in the room.  So perhaps your better judgment would best be used to stop speaking to other people as if you were.

To answer your last question directly, this is a brand new vaccine, and the variants of it have only recently been FDA approved.  It was fast-tracked in record time.  I'm glad it was and I'm glad they're available.  I got 2 jabs of Moderna and I'm still deciding whether I want a booster or not.  But I don't pretend, for example, African Americans are petulant and childish because they remember Tuskegee and don't trust the government and people like you who call them names.  I'd wager they couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter. And I bet you wouldn't tell them they're petulant and childish to their face, either.  That has its own side effect.  It tends to make a man's nose hurt.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 04:46:42 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.

Against my better judgement…

Somewhat rare? Are you kidding? Ever registered a kid for daycare? School? Summer camp?

My daughter's pediatricians office gets so many requests for vaccination records it is literally "press 4" on the main menu of their phone tree. You press it, record your kid's name, and they mail it to you within 2 business days.

I have had to prove I was vaccinated at every stage of my life… school, high school, college, graduate school, seminary. For jobs. For volunteer positions. My mother just got a reminder from the local high school that my all juniors have to provide proof of meningitis vaccination, so she will have to prove my niece (who she is raising) got that vaccine.

And none of this has really ever been that controversial. It's just THIS vaccine that sets people off. Why?

1)  You suck at ignoring people; and

2)  You persist in pretending others lack experience when in fact they merely disagree with you.  I've spoken on this very forum about registering my daughter for college, and though we did not have to request exemptions because she had every vaccine they required (and she also had the COVID-19 vaccine, which they do not), the exemptions were really easy to get.

Which job have you ever held that required you to show proof of vaccination?  Because I've literally never had that happen, and I've worked at a wide variety of places.  Was it a private job?  Did you work from home exclusively?  Could you demonstrate immunity to the disease (when my daughter registered for college, she had to show proof of a chicken pox vaccine OR proof of the disease)? 

Etc.  People other than you have thought this through.  You aren't the only one who has considered these matters.  You aren't the smartest guy in the room.  So perhaps your better judgment would best be used to stop speaking to other people as if you were.

To answer your last question directly, this is a brand new vaccine, and the variants of it have only recently been FDA approved.  It was fast-tracked in record time.  I'm glad it was and I'm glad they're available.  I got 2 jabs of Moderna and I'm still deciding whether I want a booster or not.  But I don't pretend, for example, African Americans are petulant and childish because they remember Tuskegee and don't trust the government and people like you who call them names.  I'd wager they couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter. And I bet you wouldn't tell them they're petulant and childish to their face, either.  That has its own side effect.  It tends to make a man's nose hurt.

So which is it, mandates are rare or ubiquitous?

I spoke on the thread above that I was required to prove vaccination status for CPE, as one example. Others include two previous university positions (where exemptions were decidedly not easy to get, and in one impossible as it involved foreign travel). I wouldn't say my current position requires that I prove I am vaccinated (except to serve as a chaperone on mission trips), but covid vaccination is an expectation for all church employees and lay pastoral care ministers… we just take people's word that they got it. However, is someone did decline to get it, it would be extremely difficult to continue serving in any ministerial capacity.

And of course others have thought this through. That is the reason why OSHA adopted the mandates to begin with. Along with countless private and public employers. And religious institutions.

And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.





Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Jim Butler on November 26, 2021, 05:09:33 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.

Against my better judgement…

Somewhat rare? Are you kidding? Ever registered a kid for daycare? School? Summer camp?

My daughter's pediatricians office gets so many requests for vaccination records it is literally "press 4" on the main menu of their phone tree. You press it, record your kid's name, and they mail it to you within 2 business days.

I have had to prove I was vaccinated at every stage of my life… school, high school, college, graduate school, seminary. For jobs. For volunteer positions. My mother just got a reminder from the local high school that my all juniors have to provide proof of meningitis vaccination, so she will have to prove my niece (who she is raising) got that vaccine.

And none of this has really ever been that controversial. It's just THIS vaccine that sets people off. Why?

1)  You suck at ignoring people; and

2)  You persist in pretending others lack experience when in fact they merely disagree with you.  I've spoken on this very forum about registering my daughter for college, and though we did not have to request exemptions because she had every vaccine they required (and she also had the COVID-19 vaccine, which they do not), the exemptions were really easy to get.

Which job have you ever held that required you to show proof of vaccination?  Because I've literally never had that happen, and I've worked at a wide variety of places.  Was it a private job?  Did you work from home exclusively?  Could you demonstrate immunity to the disease (when my daughter registered for college, she had to show proof of a chicken pox vaccine OR proof of the disease)? 

Etc.  People other than you have thought this through.  You aren't the only one who has considered these matters.  You aren't the smartest guy in the room.  So perhaps your better judgment would best be used to stop speaking to other people as if you were.

To answer your last question directly, this is a brand new vaccine, and the variants of it have only recently been FDA approved.  It was fast-tracked in record time.  I'm glad it was and I'm glad they're available.  I got 2 jabs of Moderna and I'm still deciding whether I want a booster or not.  But I don't pretend, for example, African Americans are petulant and childish because they remember Tuskegee and don't trust the government and people like you who call them names.  I'd wager they couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter. And I bet you wouldn't tell them they're petulant and childish to their face, either.  That has its own side effect.  It tends to make a man's nose hurt.

So which is it, mandates are rare or ubiquitous?

I spoke on the thread above that I was required to prove vaccination status for CPE, as one example. Others include two previous university positions (where exemptions were decidedly not easy to get, and in one impossible as it involved foreign travel). I wouldn't say my current position requires that I prove I am vaccinated (except to serve as a chaperone on mission trips), but covid vaccination is an expectation for all church employees and lay pastoral care ministers… we just take people's word that they got it. However, is someone did decline to get it, it would be extremely difficult to continue serving in any ministerial capacity.

And of course others have thought this through. That is the reason why OSHA adopted the mandates to begin with. Along with countless private and public employers. And religious institutions.

And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.

When I worked as a summer camp counselor, I had to give proof of vaccination for several diseases. I had to get some blood test that demonstrated that I had the antibodies in my blood.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 05:11:43 PM
I have no particular issue with being vaccinated. Yet I feel no urge to insist that other people get vaccinated. I certainly don’t think anyone owes me an explanation for why they don’t want to be vaccinated, and since the few cases I know of (imagine not bothering to share or ask about vaccination stays!) are of people I know to be thoughtful, informed, and caring, I assume their reasons are good. They don’t question my choice, at least not in conversation with me. Seems to work really well and avoid a lot of anger and anxiety.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 05:42:24 PM
Well, that virtual temper tantrum sure went a long way to convincing me that I was wrong to view your position as petulant, childish and anti-social.

I have said nothing about Christian duty. I have spoken of civic duties. The kind we all have to preform, whether we want to or not, as citizens of this country. Vaccine mandates are not new. You have offered no argument of any kind about why vaccination should not be expected of us as citizens. Or employees. You just stomp your feet and fling insults.

You are free to do so. And I am free to ignore you. Which I intend to do from now on. Take care.


Couching well-founded criticisms as "virtual temper tantrums" is likewise dishonest.  I responded to your words.  The ones where you called people like my friend petulant, childish and anti-social to begin with.  Given that vaccine mandates are not typical, and in fact in the history of our country are somewhat rare, I'd think the burden is on you to show why they should be imposed in this case.  Instead, you assume that because they've been done before, rarely, they should in this case, and you give no reasons other than YOU think it is the civic responsibility of citizens in a free country to obey you and those who carry your water.

You probably should ignore me, and I hope you do.  As I said above, your sneering elitism and immoral moralizing is not going to be well met by me.  Perhaps you'll fare better with those whose patience with such prattle has not worn thin.

Against my better judgement…

Somewhat rare? Are you kidding? Ever registered a kid for daycare? School? Summer camp?

My daughter's pediatricians office gets so many requests for vaccination records it is literally "press 4" on the main menu of their phone tree. You press it, record your kid's name, and they mail it to you within 2 business days.

I have had to prove I was vaccinated at every stage of my life… school, high school, college, graduate school, seminary. For jobs. For volunteer positions. My mother just got a reminder from the local high school that my all juniors have to provide proof of meningitis vaccination, so she will have to prove my niece (who she is raising) got that vaccine.

And none of this has really ever been that controversial. It's just THIS vaccine that sets people off. Why?

1)  You suck at ignoring people; and

2)  You persist in pretending others lack experience when in fact they merely disagree with you.  I've spoken on this very forum about registering my daughter for college, and though we did not have to request exemptions because she had every vaccine they required (and she also had the COVID-19 vaccine, which they do not), the exemptions were really easy to get.

Which job have you ever held that required you to show proof of vaccination?  Because I've literally never had that happen, and I've worked at a wide variety of places.  Was it a private job?  Did you work from home exclusively?  Could you demonstrate immunity to the disease (when my daughter registered for college, she had to show proof of a chicken pox vaccine OR proof of the disease)? 

Etc.  People other than you have thought this through.  You aren't the only one who has considered these matters.  You aren't the smartest guy in the room.  So perhaps your better judgment would best be used to stop speaking to other people as if you were.

To answer your last question directly, this is a brand new vaccine, and the variants of it have only recently been FDA approved.  It was fast-tracked in record time.  I'm glad it was and I'm glad they're available.  I got 2 jabs of Moderna and I'm still deciding whether I want a booster or not.  But I don't pretend, for example, African Americans are petulant and childish because they remember Tuskegee and don't trust the government and people like you who call them names.  I'd wager they couldn't care less about your opinion on the matter. And I bet you wouldn't tell them they're petulant and childish to their face, either.  That has its own side effect.  It tends to make a man's nose hurt.

So which is it, mandates are rare or ubiquitous?

I spoke on the thread above that I was required to prove vaccination status for CPE, as one example. Others include two previous university positions (where exemptions were decidedly not easy to get, and in one impossible as it involved foreign travel). I wouldn't say my current position requires that I prove I am vaccinated (except to serve as a chaperone on mission trips), but covid vaccination is an expectation for all church employees and lay pastoral care ministers… we just take people's word that they got it. However, is someone did decline to get it, it would be extremely difficult to continue serving in any ministerial capacity.

And of course others have thought this through. That is the reason why OSHA adopted the mandates to begin with. Along with countless private and public employers. And religious institutions.

And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.

Mandates from employers are rare.  Mandates without exceptions are rare.  OSHA mandates are unheard of.  That's why OSHA's mandates have been struck down in the Fifth Circuit, and in my estimation are likely to remain stricken.  The reasoning is pretty much in line with what I've said and not at all in line with what you would have us believe:

"(I)n its fifty-year history, OSHA has issued just ten ETSs. Six were challenged in court; only one survived. The reason for the rarity of this form of emergency action is
simple: courts and the Agency have agreed for generations that '[e]xtraordinary power is delivered to [OSHA] under the emergency provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act,' so '[t]hat power should be delicately exercised, and only in those emergency situations which require it.'”

Discussing standing, the Fifth Circuit said "(m)any of the petitioners are covered private employers within the geographical boundaries of this circuit. Their standing to sue is obvious— the Mandate imposes a financial burden upon them by deputizing their participation in OSHA’s regulatory scheme, exposes them to severe financial risk if they refuse or fail to comply, and threatens to decimate their workforces (and business prospects) by forcing unwilling employees to take their shots, take their tests, or hit the road."

Turning to the merits, the Court then said "(w)e begin by stating the obvious. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, which created OSHA, was enacted by Congress to assure Americans 'safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources.' See 29 U.S.C. § 651 (statement of findings and declaration of purpose and policy). It was not—and likely could not be, under the Commerce Clause and nondelegation doctrine—intended to authorize a workplace safety administration in the deep recesses of the federal bureaucracy to make sweeping pronouncements on matters of public health affecting every member of society in the profoundest of ways."  It went on to say "the Mandate’s strained prescriptions combine to make it the rare government pronouncement that is both overinclusive (applying to employers and employees in virtually all industries and workplaces in America, with little attempt to account for the obvious differences between the risks facing, say, a security guard on a lonely night shift, and a meatpacker working shoulder to shoulder in a cramped warehouse) and underinclusive (purporting to save employees with 99 or more coworkers from a 'grave danger' in the workplace, while making no attempt to shield employees with 98 or fewer coworkers from the very same threat). The Mandate’s stated impetus—a purported 'emergency' that the entire globe has now endured for nearly two years, and which OSHA itself spent nearly two months responding to—is unavailing as well. And its promulgation grossly exceeds OSHA’s statutory authority."  The Court said "rather than a delicately handled scalpel, the Mandate is a one-size- fits-all sledgehammer that makes hardly any attempt to account for differences in workplaces (and workers) that have more than a little bearing on workers’ varying degrees of susceptibility to the supposedly 'grave danger' the Mandate purports to address." 

You should read the whole decision.  You can find it here:

https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/21/21-60845-CV0.pdf

It basically lays to waste the very ideas you are espousing -- that the government has the extra-legislative power to order such a mandate by bureaucratic fiat, that the dangers presented by COVID warrant such a mandate, or that it is any sort of "civic duty" to submit to one.  It states expressly that Congress has no authority to legislate police power, as this is a power reserved to the several states. Which means that unless and until the state of Georgia imposes a vaccine mandate that is upheld by the courts, I don't really have to worry much from you and yours. 

Now, obviously, this is not the final word on the matter.  There may be an en banc review, and there certainly will be multidistrict litigation and the Supreme Court will ultimately weigh in.  But acting as if people are deluded for not agreeing with you, and pretending we must have never heard of school systems requiring certain vaccinations for attendance, etc., is hardly a good tack to take.  Delta Airlines is already backing off its own internal mandate.  You can probably guess why -- enough people refused that they did not think it a fight worth having.  Another friend of mine is one of those who refused.  I disagreed with his decision and his reasoning and told him so, but I also walked him through the process of applying for a religious-based exemption, which was ultimately granted before Delta decided actually forcing people to get vaccines is a lot harder than saying you're going to force them to do so.  Other employers will follow suit as they realize their employees are not their possessions, but rather something they need in order for their business to survive.  A number of them are among the plaintiffs in the Fifth Circuit case I cited above.

If you want to convince people to have vaccines, it would be much wiser to actually attempt to convince them instead of calling them names and pretending to wield power that neither you nor the government you would have do your dirty work actually possess.  Nobody has to listen to you.  Nobody has to care what you think.  And when the government oversteps, the courts are there to restrain it.  Thanks be to God.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 26, 2021, 05:46:14 PM
If you don't believe me on that last part, believe pre-election Joe Biden, who suggested he would never impose a vaccine mandate (he lied), and for this reason:

"That reality may be behind President-elect Biden's statement that he would not support a government mandate that all Americans receive a Covid-19 vaccination. The attempt to implement one - even if supported by science and legal precedent dating back more than a century - could create a groundswell of opposition that would prove counterproductive to public health."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55193939
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: James S. Rustad on November 26, 2021, 06:09:58 PM
A very interesting article on the state of the law on mandatory vaccination:
Quote from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449224/
As the 20th century began, epidemics of infectious diseases such as smallpox remained a recurrent threat. A Massachusetts statute granted city boards of health the authority to require vaccination “when necessary for public health or safety.” In 1902, when smallpox surged in Cambridge, the city’s board of health issued an order pursuant to this authority that required all adults to be vaccinated to halt the disease. The statutory penalty for refusing vaccination was a monetary fine of $5 (about $100 today). There was no provision for actually forcing vaccination on any person.

Henning Jacobson refused vaccination, claiming that he and his son had had bad reactions to earlier vaccinations. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found it unnecessary to worry about any possible harm from vaccination, because no one could actually be forced to be vaccinated: “If a person should deem it important that vaccination should not be performed in his case, and the authorities should think otherwise, it is not in their power to vaccinate him by force, and the worst that could happen to him under the statute would be the payment of $5.” Jacobson was fined, and he appealed to the US Supreme Court.

SCOTUS upheld the Massachusetts law.

Quote from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449224/
n 1922, in Zucht v King, the only other US Supreme Court decision that addressed immunizations, the Court upheld a city ordinance that prohibited anyone from attending a public or private school without a certificate of smallpox vaccination. Rosalyn Zucht, who refused vaccination, challenged the ordinance as unnecessary after she was excluded from school. The Court did not mention the questions of whether smallpox posed any danger, whether vaccination was necessary, or whether the ordinance was arbitrary or oppressive. Its 3-paragraph opinion noted simply that states can grant cities broad authority to decide when to impose health regulations.

The remainder of the article explores how US jurisprudence has changed since these two cases.  This includes:

Quote from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449224/
Likewise, a state statute that actually forced people to be vaccinated over their refusal, such as Florida’s new “public health emergency” law, would probably be an unconstitutional violation of the right to refuse treatment.

Sooner or later SCOTUS will have to decide a case about one of these state laws.  It will be interesting to see just how SCOTUS explains their decision, whichever way it goes.

Right now, we're seeing the OSHA mandate work its way through the courts.  To date the case has not been going well for OSHA.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 26, 2021, 07:18:13 PM
The reluctance to give arguments against the vaccines might indicate that there are no good arguments. You just pound the table and yell louder.

That judgment is also noted.

Quote
Even though I have my opinion, it doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other views.

I am now being lazy and assuming when people cannot think of any justification for something millions of their neighbors are doing, such a person is not, in fact, interested in hearing other views, but rather in sniffing their own farts.  If you seriously cannot come up with an example of why someone refusing to get a vaccine is loving his neighbor, then you and your unjustifiably high opinion of your own opinions are the problem.


It is also my belief that it is much, much better to hear arguments directly from "the horse's mouth," than to make up my own about others. A friend, we just recently meant, came over for Thanksgiving dinner, (with a long-time friend). He was taught by his mother, growing up in Texas, that every other denomination except Baptists were cults. He came to question her argument when he attended Catholic masses in the military (because their service times were more convenient for him). Lutherans were also seen as a cult. I've also read articles by Lutherans that are anti-Catholic, which, when talking to Catholics, are untrue or at best, a mischaracterization of their beliefs. Similarly, a Catholic friend asked me about some Lutheran things that a priest had taught him about Lutheranism; and they were mischaracterizations.

Have you considered that you are the one accusing others of cultism here?  The problem is not that you are asking for arguments "from the horse's mouth," but rather that you render judgments without charity.

I'll give you one example, leaving some details out since this is a friend of mine and none of your business, to hopefully illustrate my point.  I know a man who works for a large corporation that is impacted by the vaccine mandates President Biden put into place earlier this year.  He has been told that he must be vaccinated or he will lose his job by year's end.  So this particular company, a government contractor, has gone beyond the mandate to essentially say "get vaccinated or else."  He was given the same justification the mandate does -- it's for "workplace safety."

He has a chronic disease that makes him concerned about the effects of the vaccine.  He's already had COVID, and therefore is not worried about immunity because he already has it.  But the real kicker is this -- he works from home.  That's right -- in the name of workplace safety, they are forcing a guy with chronic diseases who is at least as immune from reinfection as any vaccinated person to get a chemical injected in his body, to protect a workplace he never goes to.

You want to put the burden on him to demonstrate why his refusal to be vaccinated demonstrates love of God and neighbor.  But my question is to you -- why should he have to decide between feeding his family and getting a vaccine he doesn't need and which might harm him to placate your fears?  More to the point, why aren't you viewing HIM as your neighbor instead of viewing yourself as his? 

Worry about your duty to your neighbor, and leave my friend alone.  That's my response.


I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Robert Johnson on November 26, 2021, 07:36:16 PM

I also had covid before there were vaccines available. And thought long and hard before getting vaccinated. And here's the thing: the vaccines offer superior protection than any kind of "natural immunity."

I'm reading a lot of studies that point in the opposite direction; that natural immunity is much more powerful than the "vaccines". (the Moderna type injections are not vaccines in the normal sense of a vaccine -- that is, they are not weakened versions of the disease itself.)
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: pastorg1@aol.com on November 26, 2021, 08:20:14 PM
With this latest mutation out of Africa we may have to get sick again.

Otherwise it is as if we were in a sci-if movie wherein we have all been offered and have taken an immortality pill. We have to take this pill regularly or we die. No one gets ill any more. If you do take the pill you are enlightened and admired. If you don’t take the pill you are not only dead but ridiculed.

With the latest virus mutation we may have to give up any dreams of never being sick again from this virus or related viruses. We may have to get sick again as in the days when the sick would go to work, to school, on airplanes, to church and infect their fellows with no hard feelings from the infected. We may have to coordinate with hospitals and take our children to the modern equivalent of “chickenpox parties” so we achieve herd immunity sooner.

The social disruptions of the vaccination mandates cause suspicion of science, of political parties and of one’s neighbor. It may be the time to get sick and, most likely, recover.

Peter (Jacked up on Moderna, Pfizer, and the Medicine of Immortality in the Holy Eucharist) Garrison
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on November 26, 2021, 08:21:44 PM
And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.

Yup, when all else fails, go on the (dishonestly veiled) personal attack.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Donald_Kirchner on November 26, 2021, 08:27:24 PM
And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.

Yup, when all else fails, go to the (dishonestly veiled) personal attack.

Too bad. I was enjoying reading the discussion.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 11:16:27 PM
I don't think anything has failed… not really. The mandates are working. The number of people who are actually willing to risk being dismissed from their jobs, versus bellyaching about it, has turned out to be far fewer than many claimed.

A panel of 5th Circuit, three GOP appointed judges, made a ruling. Some applauded it. Others decried it. I guess some here see it as vindication. I wouldn't be so certain: there's a lot of litigation at play. We'll see how things turn out.

Mandates work. They are not uncommon, despite unsubstantiated claims to the opposite. Particularly for healthcare related fields, those in government, education, jobs involving foreign travel, etc. they are pretty standard. That some have decided to make an issue of THIS vaccine, versus all the others, is just another unfortunate chapter in our culture wars. Meanwhile, again, 1000+ deaths a day.

What makes me sad is that in an alternate timeline, everything would be the opposite. Had the vaccines been approved before the last presidential election, and had Trump (rightfully) taken full credit for them, and had that factored into his re-election… well, we'd be through the looking glass, wouldn't we? The arguments would be all the same, but many of the people making them would be on opposite sides.

We have (semi-miraculously) the means to avoid hundreds of thousands of needless deaths. And we're treating it like any other political football. We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest. Heaven help us if we ever need to implement a draft again. Or actually pay the national debt. It's all sovereign citizens from here on out…

Glad you enjoyed the conversation.

Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 26, 2021, 11:33:32 PM
I’m not sure that political lens is accurate. Mandates would go against the grain of Trump’s base and would be amenable to the progressive mindset regardless of the election results.

I don’t doubt mandates work. If that is the only consideration, we should have a lot more mandates than we have. But whether it increases the number of vaccinated isn’t the only consideration. You really have to objectify people to think it a success story that so many of them are vaccinated against their own will.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 26, 2021, 11:49:20 PM
I’m not sure that political lens is accurate. Mandates would go against the grain of Trump’s base and would be amenable to the progressive mindset regardless of the election results.

I don’t doubt mandates work. If that is the only consideration, we should have a lot more mandates than we have. But whether it increases the number of vaccinated isn’t the only consideration. You really have to objectify people to think it a success story that so many of them are vaccinated against their own will.

I have no doubt that it is accurate. If it was Kamala Harris out there telling people "Don't take a Trump Vaccine" it wouldn't take long before we saw Red State mandates… and Trump's base had about a dozen cows over players kneeling at football games and seeks new and innovative ways to restrict reproductive health options… so it's not like personal autonomy is sacrosanct. The decision to put all our chips on the vaccines was made in the Trump White House. I think many on the left would have preferred Australian style lock-downs. And previously, anti-vaccine activism was largely driven by the political left.

As to objectifying people: the same arguments were made when smoking became heavily restricted. And when helmet and seatbelt laws are implemented. Making people do things against their will (like say: pay taxes or obey the speed limit) is pretty much a natural function of government. I think it's far more objectifying to say: we are ok with countless people dying as a consequence of other people's desire not to be inconvenienced. From second hand smoke to second hand covid (and its all second hand), regulating the common air we all breathe is part of living in community.

Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 12:35:32 AM
I voted against Wisconsin’s smoking ban even though I enjoyed the results of it. I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there. And I’ve never smoked a single cigarette and hate the smell even at several removes. I often shower immediately after visiting a shut in who smokes because the smell of their furniture gets  on my clothes. But I still think smoking bans are a bad idea. And I still think vaccine mandates are a bad idea, and I hope they get thrown out in court, though I don’t know enough about the law to know on what grounds they would stand or fall other than that they weren’t enacted by Congress.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 27, 2021, 01:20:58 AM
Peter writes:
I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there.
I comment:
I have seen ads for "Cigar bars," where those seeking that kind of ugliness can find it.
But your view is short-sighted. Many would choose to go to the smoke-filled bars or restaurants, put up with the smell, and - ta da! - be made sick by the second-hand smoke. Workers, too, might make the hard choice - like working in a coal mine - and be made sick. The result is a public health problem. Again, the smoke affects not only the smoker, but in public places, it affects others.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 08:35:35 AM
I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 08:50:24 AM
I don't think anything has failed… not really. The mandates are working. The number of people who are actually willing to risk being dismissed from their jobs, versus bellyaching about it, has turned out to be far fewer than many claimed.

A panel of 5th Circuit, three GOP appointed judges, made a ruling. Some applauded it. Others decried it. I guess some here see it as vindication. I wouldn't be so certain: there's a lot of litigation at play. We'll see how things turn out.

Mandates work. They are not uncommon, despite unsubstantiated claims to the opposite. Particularly for healthcare related fields, those in government, education, jobs involving foreign travel, etc. they are pretty standard. That some have decided to make an issue of THIS vaccine, versus all the others, is just another unfortunate chapter in our culture wars. Meanwhile, again, 1000+ deaths a day.

What makes me sad is that in an alternate timeline, everything would be the opposite. Had the vaccines been approved before the last presidential election, and had Trump (rightfully) taken full credit for them, and had that factored into his re-election… well, we'd be through the looking glass, wouldn't we? The arguments would be all the same, but many of the people making them would be on opposite sides.

We have (semi-miraculously) the means to avoid hundreds of thousands of needless deaths. And we're treating it like any other political football. We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest. Heaven help us if we ever need to implement a draft again. Or actually pay the national debt. It's all sovereign citizens from here on out…

Glad you enjoyed the conversation.

"We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest."

The problem is, this just isn't true.  I gave reasons in the other thread why I am vaccinated, why I encouraged my reluctant wife and our kids to get vaccinated, how I've convinced others to get vaccinated, how my African American friend was convinced by his wife to get vaccinated, etc.  There are all sorts of cases to be made.

The case you are trying to make, along with your fellow nanny-staters here, is the best way to encourage Americans to get vaccinated is to force them on pain of financial ruin to get vaccinated.  And that is just not a good case.  You want to tell them to get vaccinated because you think it's best for them.  It's why I started my discussion with you by noting precisely that -- no one has to listen to you.  No one has to care.  This is a free country.

It's weird to me that you default to that position.  It's almost as if you're used to being able to tell people what to do, though I would find that even weirder given your occupation.  Maybe it's just your personality.  I don't know.  I do know it doesn't come across any better from you than it does Pastor Austin or Pastor Stoffregen, and normal people don't react well to it.  So you should stop, but as I said earlier, you won't, because you three have convinced yourselves you are on the side of the angels. 

You accused me upstream of "framing" the issue as one of personal liberty.  I think I see why you went there now, and it isn't because you're dishonest (which is what I assumed, because it's really not a legitimate argument).  It's because you simply don't care about personal liberty, because YOU have framed it through this lens of public health and your desire for people to do what's best for them as YOU see it.  You're the one whose lens is distorted.  Your examples, and Pastor Austin's extension of those examples, show that clearly.  It isn't that either of you thinks you are in any real danger.  You're both vaccinated, as I am.  And it isn't that either of you are concerned about some unvaccinated person harming someone other than themselves, because after all the unvaccinated for the most part choose to be so, and the vaccinated, as public health officials keep reminding us, are not the ones filling our hospitals to the brim.

It really boils down to this -- you both think that you know better than other people, and you want them to do what you think is best for them whether they want to or not.  With that mindset, personal liberty is an affront to you getting to lord your views over other people.  And I trust it comes from a place of Christian love and compassion.  I don't believe either of you would force someone to listen to the same music as you, or eat the same food, or whatever, in the privacy of their own homes (though I bet you would support limitations on portion size and fried foods and so forth in public spaces -- you're free to tell me I'm wrong about that).  I trust you really, really think you know what's best for them.  The problem is, you don't get to make that decision in a free country.  They aren't your children.  They aren't your parishioners.  They're your countrymen, and whether it hurts your soul to see them suffer or not, you have to persuade them.  Persuading them is what I've been doing, often over and against the efforts of people like you and Pastor Austin and Pastor Stoffregen and our president, who lied to them.  And as I've said many times before, I'd bet I've done more to get reluctant people to get the vaccine than any of you have.  Because I treat them as equals, not children or fools.

I also view them that way, and it would do you all well to do likewise.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 27, 2021, 08:51:52 AM
Can someone restate for us, perhaps again, the reason for these attempts to justify refusing vaccinations and to minimize the effects of the pandemic, and to cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines and the other efforts to mitigate the effects of the disease? Why is that being done?
Vaccines are indeed mandated for many many things in our country. Presumably those mandates have been tested in the courts.
What is different now?
What basic human rights are at stake? What about our experts makes them so subject to suspicion?
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 08:54:27 AM
Peter writes:
I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there.
I comment:
I have seen ads for "Cigar bars," where those seeking that kind of ugliness can find it.
But your view is short-sighted. Many would choose to go to the smoke-filled bars or restaurants, put up with the smell, and - ta da! - be made sick by the second-hand smoke. Workers, too, might make the hard choice - like working in a coal mine - and be made sick. The result is a public health problem. Again, the smoke affects not only the smoker, but in public places, it affects others.
I don't think my view is short-sighted at all. Yes, lots of people make decisions that aren't good for them. This very moment there is probably an overweight person eating extra bacon for breakfast. As I speak someone practicing for a marathon runs past and might become one of those people whose joints wear out at an early age. Someone is flying around in a prop plane giving sightseeing tours who would probably be much safer on the ground. They are putting an unnecessary strain on our medical and first responder system. I just heard yesterday that some international snowboarding star was killed while snowboarding; hit his head on a snow-covered rock when he fell. You might think he doesn't hurt others, but he was filming something that glorifies snowboarding, and snowboarding is in the Olympics so now, because of daredevils like him, a whole generation of kids is going to risk their lives on the slopes just for the fun of it. I'd rather live in a world where people make their own (possibly) bad choices than have their (probably) safer choices made for them. I think it is short-sighted to think that mandates that result in greater safety necessarily lead to the greatest amount of happiness and well-being.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 08:57:30 AM
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.

Good.  That's a good start. 

As to the rest, I'll say again, you are the one casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines.  Because you pretend that the unvaccinated are a danger to you even though you are vaccinated.

I'm not afraid of the unvaccinated.  I believe my vaccines worked.  But it isn't about them being a threat to you, as I said just immediately upstream.  It's about you and your fellow travelers getting to tell other people what to do.  At its core, it's just naked elitism.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Charles Austin on November 27, 2021, 09:04:21 AM
Mr. Garner, you do understand that we are likely to speak differently when we are talking to an individual, trying to persuade him to accept the vaccination? I was so gentle with one distant relative who was refusing the vaccination that I hardly recognized myself in the conversation. What finally convinced this person? They planned a trip to Iceland, and proof of vaccination was required.
And Peter seems to make a great leap,, probably the great leap of all great leaps. He thinks that if there is a mandates to get vaccinated pretty soon that will be mandates on what to eat for breakfast. It’s the old domino theory again.
P.S. I have been an avid skier, in the French and Swiss Alps, on East Coast bullet-proof ice, and in the Rockies. Tens of thousands of us get hurt. I never did, despite my foolishness in trying to keep up with my European friends. Do our broken bones, torn ACL’s, and Occasional death constitute a public health crisis? I don’t think so.
But refusing vaccinations…

P.S. “The Naked Elitist” would be a good book title.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 09:05:33 AM
Perhaps to return this to a theological basis:

"(Pride's) midpoint comes with the humiliation of our neighbor, the shameless parading of our achievements, complacency, and unwillingness to be found out.”   

-- Saint John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, 207.

St. John shows us that pride is not satisfied with having eradicated humility in the self, but seeks to defend the self at the risk of humiliating our neighbor.  Pride, says St. John, “will take up the space of all the other eleven [passions].”   Pride is not merely the antithesis of humility, but in fact eschews humility for me and renders humiliation for thee.  It is not merely the love of one passion, but the inflaming of all passions.  It finds itself manifested in the rejection of criticism, rather than love of it as St. John taught is proper in the chapter dealing with obedience.  Pride, according to St. John, seeks the humiliation of our neighbor, but humblemindedness seeks his defense.  We are to judge our own sins and cover those of our neighbor.

I'm wondering how each of us would square his position on vaccine mandates with these thoughts from St. John?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 09:06:35 AM
Mr. Garner, you do understand that we are likely to speak differently when we are talking to an individual, trying to persuade him to accept the vaccination? I was so gentle with one distant relative who was refusing the vaccination that I hardly recognized myself in the conversation. What finally convinced this person? They planned a trip to Iceland, and proof of vaccination was required.

Then what purpose do your haughty and judgmental words here serve?  To what end do you put them into the universe?

Do they just make you feel better?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Coach-Rev on November 27, 2021, 09:10:17 AM
The mandates are working.

Then you obviously don't live in the heartland of America, to utter such nonsense as that.

Either that, or if by "the mandates are working," you mean supply chain shortages, now looming hospital staff shortages, few willing to work for a living in most sectors, inflation through the roof, a divided America like no other time before in history, then I guess you would be right.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 09:11:16 AM
Can someone restate for us, perhaps again, the reason for these attempts to justify refusing vaccinations and to minimize the effects of the pandemic, and to cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines and the other efforts to mitigate the effects of the disease? Why is that being done?
Vaccines are indeed mandated for many many things in our country. Presumably those mandates have been tested in the courts.
What is different now?
What basic human rights are at stake? What about our experts makes them so subject to suspicion?
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.
As for your last question first, the fact that you even need to ask that makes clear you are completely in the dark about life outside your bubble.

I didn't refuse the vaccine, bit I know people who chose not to get vaccinated, and even if I don't fully understand or agree with their reasons, I prefer they make their own choices to mandating that they behave as though they agree with me.

I also have a gut reaction against anything that smells of propaganda, like overstatements and misleading statements to get people to behave a certain way. When vaccinated people live in fear of the unvaccinated, they make an unconvincing case for vaccination, but when people acknowledge the flaws and the unreliability of vaccines while getting vaccinated themselves, I think they make a more convincing case. When someone insists that there is no danger when you've seen the danger, they lose credibility. Better to acknowledge the danger and help people overcome their suspicion of it. But if everyone who points out the danger is called a purveyor of misinformation even though they are speaking the truth, all that does is undermine anyone's confidence in any information.

I also look at people's behavior rather than their statements. People who take private jets to carbon reduction conferences, or who party maskless after supporting mask mandates, or who speechify about supporting public schools while sending their own children to private schools, lose all credibility.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 09:17:00 AM

And Peter seems to make a great leap,, probably the great leap of all great leaps. He thinks that if there is a mandates to get vaccinated pretty soon that will be mandates on what to eat for breakfast. It’s the old domino theory again.

You realize nearly all of your arguments have been applications of the domino theory, right? That since we have seatbelt mandates, ergo we can have vaccine mandates. Since we have smoking bans, we can ban more behaviors without rehashing the whole liberty question; we just use the precedent of this rule to justify that rule. You've used the domino theory to insist that what you want now is a just a continuation and extension of what we've already accepted, but you object to my pointing out what sorts of things lie further down that road.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 09:22:26 AM

And Peter seems to make a great leap,, probably the great leap of all great leaps. He thinks that if there is a mandates to get vaccinated pretty soon that will be mandates on what to eat for breakfast. It’s the old domino theory again.

You realize nearly all of your arguments have been applications of the domino theory, right? That since we have seatbelt mandates, ergo we can have vaccine mandates. Since we have smoking bans, we can ban more behaviors without rehashing the whole liberty question; we just use the precedent of this rule to justify that rule. You've use the domino theory to insist that what you want now is a just a continuation and extension of what we've already accepted, but you object to my pointing out what sorts of things lie further down that road.

This is not an accident.  As you know already, it is what Dreher calls "the Law of Merited Impossibility," that is, "this will never happen, and when it does you bigots will deserve it."

Gaslighting is their stock in trade.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 09:25:23 AM
I should note, by "they" I don't mean to include Fr. Dana, who I have not seen engage in any gaslighting here. Since I discussed him in conjunction with Pr. Austin above, I thought I should note this doesn't refer to him.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dave Benke on November 27, 2021, 12:50:51 PM
I'm interested in the comparisons with smoking bans in public places and mandates with regard to the CORONA virus.  The mandates with regard to smoking have produced two results that are positive, from studies I've read -
a) better health outcomes with declines in lung and heart disease
b) with the behavior being placed semi out of sight, less people take up smoking to begin with. 

I like those outcomes.  Having buried plenty of parishioners through the years (40) who were moderate to heavy smokers and died of smoking-related health conditions in lungs/heart/tongue/throat, I don't think it wrong to limit indoor smoking and have supported it throughout.  Theoretically, is this primarily a limit on someone's freedom or primarily a responsible way to mandate good health options?  In NYC, we don't have "open carry" when it comes to alcohol on the streets or in public places or in your automobile outside those locations that are serving food or are for the purpose of drinking alcohol (ie bars/taverns).  Again, this seems to me to be a health mandate with emphasis both on what you might do to yourself and what you might do to others.

As far as I know, the faith communities across the board are in favor of both the bans on smoking and open carry alcohol.  Are there serious dissenters?

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 01:02:37 PM
I'm interested in the comparisons with smoking bans in public places and mandates with regard to the CORONA virus.  The mandates with regard to smoking have produced two results that are positive, from studies I've read -
a) better health outcomes with declines in lung and heart disease
b) with the behavior being placed semi out of sight, less people take up smoking to begin with. 

I like those outcomes.  Having buried plenty of parishioners through the years (40) who were moderate to heavy smokers and died of smoking-related health conditions in lungs/heart/tongue/throat, I don't think it wrong to limit indoor smoking and have supported it throughout.  Theoretically, is this primarily a limit on someone's freedom or primarily a responsible way to mandate good health options?  In NYC, we don't have "open carry" when it comes to alcohol on the streets or in public places or in your automobile outside those locations that are serving food or are for the purpose of drinking alcohol (ie bars/taverns).  Again, this seems to me to be a health mandate with emphasis both on what you might do to yourself and what you might do to others.

As far as I know, the faith communities across the board are in favor of both the bans on smoking and open carry alcohol.  Are there serious dissenters?

Dave Benke
The problem is an underlying materialist mindset that sees health and other tangibles as the only factor and liberty as a straw man distraction. A zoo animal probably lives longer, eats better, and is less likely to get mauled by some other animal than any animal in the wild. But there is something sad about seeing a caged animal. China’s social credit system promotes good health and so forth, but it is dystopian, not utopian. It at least infantilizes if not dehumanizes people when the state grows too intrusive.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 27, 2021, 01:53:02 PM
I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.


Your example of opposing the virus had nothing to do with his love of God or neighbor. He had legitimate reasons against the virus, but none of them had to do with his faith in God through Christ.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 01:56:54 PM
I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.


Your example of opposing the virus had nothing to do with his love of God or neighbor. He had legitimate reasons against the virus, but none of them had to do with his faith in God through Christ.

Of course.  Because he could not prioritize his own health, taking care of his family, the ability to take care of his family, etc., above people like you irrationally feeling better about themselves.  His wife isn't his neighbor.  His kids aren't his neighbor.  You are his neighbor, and he'd better do what you say or else.

The fact that you view the world this way is honestly incredible.  To you, HE is Jesus.  And as I said well upstream, you leave him bleeding in the ditch.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 27, 2021, 01:58:02 PM
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.

Good.  That's a good start. 

As to the rest, I'll say again, you are the one casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines.  Because you pretend that the unvaccinated are a danger to you even though you are vaccinated.

I'm not afraid of the unvaccinated.  I believe my vaccines worked.  But it isn't about them being a threat to you, as I said just immediately upstream.  It's about you and your fellow travelers getting to tell other people what to do.  At its core, it's just naked elitism.


Well, during my years of preaching, I often told people what to do.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 02:01:50 PM
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.

Good.  That's a good start. 

As to the rest, I'll say again, you are the one casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines.  Because you pretend that the unvaccinated are a danger to you even though you are vaccinated.

I'm not afraid of the unvaccinated.  I believe my vaccines worked.  But it isn't about them being a threat to you, as I said just immediately upstream.  It's about you and your fellow travelers getting to tell other people what to do.  At its core, it's just naked elitism.


Well, during my years of preaching, I often told people what to do.

Yes, I'm sure that's precisely the same thing.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 27, 2021, 02:13:06 PM
I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.


Your example of opposing the virus had nothing to do with his love of God or neighbor. He had legitimate reasons against the virus, but none of them had to do with his faith in God through Christ.

Of course.  Because he could not prioritize his own health, taking care of his family, the ability to take care of his family, etc., above people like you irrationally feeling better about themselves.  His wife isn't his neighbor.  His kids aren't his neighbor.  You are his neighbor, and he'd better do what you say or else.

The fact that you view the world this way is honestly incredible.  To you, HE is Jesus.  And as I said well upstream, you leave him bleeding in the ditch.


Well, I got the vaccine, and took my wife and mother to get the vaccine, and encourage our sons to get the vaccine; precisely because I have a priority on our health, and taking care of the family, and with a concern for the neighbors I might run into in public places.


As I read the parable, it is Jesus who takes the bleeding man out of the ditch and does everything possible to bring him back to health - including paying to have the innkeeper continue to care for the injured man. Among other interpretations, I can easily see us as the innkeeper. People who have been told and empowered and promised the resources to bring health and healing to all the suffering people in the world.


We've seen in happen with other viruses, when enough people are vaccinated, the virus no longer infects people. Perhaps more properly, our human antibodies are able to keep the virus from growing enough to be a problem in our bodies. In addition, the viruses inability to grow also limits its ability to mutate into variant forms.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 02:15:25 PM
I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.


Your example of opposing the virus had nothing to do with his love of God or neighbor. He had legitimate reasons against the virus, but none of them had to do with his faith in God through Christ.

Of course.  Because he could not prioritize his own health, taking care of his family, the ability to take care of his family, etc., above people like you irrationally feeling better about themselves.  His wife isn't his neighbor.  His kids aren't his neighbor.  You are his neighbor, and he'd better do what you say or else.

The fact that you view the world this way is honestly incredible.  To you, HE is Jesus.  And as I said well upstream, you leave him bleeding in the ditch.


Well, I got the vaccine, and took my wife and mother to get the vaccine, and encourage our sons to get the vaccine; precisely because I have a priority on our health, and taking care of the family, and with a concern for the neighbors I might run into in public places.


As I read the parable, it is Jesus who takes the bleeding man out of the ditch and does everything possible to bring him back to health - including paying to have the innkeeper continue to care for the injured man. Among other interpretations, I can easily see us as the innkeeper. People who have been told and empowered and promised the resources to bring health and healing to all the suffering people in the world.


We've seen in happen with other viruses, when enough people are vaccinated, the virus no longer infects people. Perhaps more properly, our human antibodies are able to keep the virus from growing enough to be a problem in our bodies. In addition, the viruses inability to grow also limits its ability to mutate into variant forms.

Does it bother you that you're always the hero in Jesus' parables?

I'm being very serious here.  I don't mean to be sarcastic in the slightest.  Do you really think that's how He intends for you to read them?
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on November 27, 2021, 02:21:10 PM

Does it bother you that you're always the hero in Jesus' parables?

I'm being very serious here.  I don't mean to be sarcastic in the slightest.  Do you really think that's how He intends for you to read them?


As I noted, the identification with the innkeeper is one way of interpreting the parable. Most often when I've preached on this text - especially at a couple of funerals for youth - I've tried to put all of us in the ditch with the beat up, suffering guy; with Jesus coming into the ditch to help bring us out. That's another way of interpreting the parable.


Gone are the days when scholars thought that there was only one right way to interpret scriptures.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: David Garner on November 27, 2021, 02:22:47 PM

Does it bother you that you're always the hero in Jesus' parables?

I'm being very serious here.  I don't mean to be sarcastic in the slightest.  Do you really think that's how He intends for you to read them?


As I noted, the identification with the innkeeper is one way of interpreting the parable. Most often when I've preached on this text - especially at a couple of funerals for youth - I've tried to put all of us in the ditch with the beat up, suffering guy; with Jesus coming into the ditch to help bring us out. That's another way of interpreting the parable.


Gone are the days when scholars thought that there was only one right way to interpret scriptures.

I assume that's a no.  I find that tragic.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Robert Johnson on November 27, 2021, 02:44:06 PM
If it was Kamala Harris out there telling people "Don't take a Trump Vaccine" it wouldn't take long before we saw Red State mandates…

She did say that, before she said something opposite.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: peter_speckhard on November 27, 2021, 03:30:21 PM
This article goes over some of the same territory we’ve been conceding re:mandates and public trust.

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/america-gaslight-ilana-redstone
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 27, 2021, 03:38:29 PM
If it was Kamala Harris out there telling people "Don't take a Trump Vaccine" it wouldn't take long before we saw Red State mandates…

She did say that, before she said something opposite.

That was the point. It illustrated the plausibility of my counter-factual… whereas in an alternate universe we are having the same discussion but (many people) are arguing the opposite of what they are saying now. Which, granted, is more an observation about our "national discourse" than a judgement of any participant on this forum.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dana Lockhart on November 27, 2021, 04:04:13 PM
I am going to take a step back as say… I agree with David Garner on the importance of persuasion. If you look at my comments from beginning to end, I started with a position that I think is fundamentally conservative… do one's duty, take responsibility for the good of the community. This is an old Yankee mindset (though not limited to natives of New England) that encourages an active citizenry taking an active role in the shaping the community. It is an appeal to patriotism, civic virtue, and old fashioned values.

I grew up in a place where major decisions were made communally in "town meetings," and it is in my bones. For that kind of society, you need a certain amount of seriousness among the populace, a strong community spirit and (unfortunately) a far amount of peer pressure. Not to sound nostalgic, but I actually think a system where you socially chide your able-bodied neighbor for not keeping up their lawn (and show up to do the lawn work, without expectation of payment, of the widow next door) rather than a world with endless rules (HOAs) and ordinances. From the get-go, I was accused of the exact opposite… which I take responsibility for, since I obviously could have been clearer in my musings.

Of course: when community spirit breaks down and division sets in and appeals to virtue are not working… then you get ordinances and laws and more sticks than carrots from the government. I actually hate this… even if I (and I assume, when it comes down to it, all of us) agree that it is necessary… we just tend to disagree… vehemently… WHEN it is necessary.

And we disagree on whether it is necessary in this instance. I see Biden as moving towards mandates reluctantly, because vaccine uptake had stalled, and, after a ton of energy was put into persuasion… even to the point of outright bribery…. for the good of the country, we needed to raise the vaccination rates in the short term. Before winter. Before another massive wave of infection. Before our already strained health care systems had to absorb another massive blow.

[ETA: Accordingly I also (reluctantly) support mandates. I would probably go further than the Biden administration has gone. Not out of love for power and coercion, but because vaccine rates did stall at levels that left us with an ongoing pandemic indefinitely. And it did look like good faith efforts to persuade were not working because the vaccines, in and of themselves, had become politicized. There are communities in this nation with historical and cultural reasons to be suspicious… and so efforts to persuade and understand and listen should continue. But in my neck of the woods… the noted liberal enclave of Kentucky… the low vaccination rates are not being driven by minority groups. Instead, vaccines have become another rallying point in our ridiculous culture war… right up there with whether or not you eat at Chik-Fil-A. Except… 1,000+ deaths a day. Which raises the stakes a bit.]

I also reject the idea that all of this boils down to individualism… every individual's choice in the pandemic… to mask, or not to mask, to vaccinate, or not to vaccinate… has ramifications for others. That is not an obsession with power and control on my part (I don't seek to micromanage anyone's life… I can barely manage my own). It is just reality. When the ICU's get filled with unvaccinated patients, other people's surgeries get postponed or canceled. I have seen that happen in my family and in my community. It isn't the case that the unvaccinated solely bear the consequences of their decisions… others are also impacted.

So what I have attempted here… and likely failed… but alas… intentions matter… is call for greater responsibility. Greater civic pride, duty, obligation. Not because of laws… laws are there for when virtue has failed… but because we understand that we are part of our neighborhoods and our towns and our cities and our states and our country. David Garner might detect in here some lingering whiff of totalitarianism… but really, I do not think it is there. It's merely a call to consider responsibilities in addition to rights… not just what are my own individual freedoms, but also what moral (not legal) obligations do I have to others?

I would argue getting vaccinated is in 98% of the cases a responsible act, a mark of good citizenry, and a sign of neighbor love. I freely concede that in a minority of cases, this would not be so, so judgement should be withheld and compassionate responses created.

And I also decry: maybe too stridently… the reality that we face a challenge of a society lacking in virtue… in a political arms race with one side pitted against another… so that immaturity reigns. That is how we get appeals to religious exemptions from one corner… not always sincere… and attempts to remove religious exemptions from mandates from others (e.g. Maine's healthcare worker mandate). It is a zero sum game of power and control. Who is calling for greater responsibility right now?

Tom Nichols, Kevin Williamson, David Brooks… all have made versions of this argument better than I have here. But it is a problem. A big one, if we are going to endure as a free society. A republic needs more than a republican constitution and republican laws… it needs republican values. The same goes for a democracy.

As others have observed, politics are downstream from culture… and the politics of vaccine mandates in 2021 point to a sick culture.
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: John_Hannah on November 27, 2021, 04:32:50 PM
I am going to take a step back as say… I agree with David Garner on the importance of persuasion. If you look at my comments from beginning to end, I started with a position that I think is fundamentally conservative… do one's duty, take responsibility for the good of the community. This is an old Yankee mindset (though not limited to natives of New England) that encourages an active citizenry taking an active role in the shaping the community. It is an appeal to patriotism, civic virtue, and old fashioned values.

I grew up in a place where major decisions were made communally in "town meetings," and it is in my bones. For that kind of society, you need a certain amount of seriousness among the populace, a strong community spirit and (unfortunately) a far amount of peer pressure. Not to sound nostalgic, but I actually think a system where you socially chide your able-bodied neighbor for not keeping up their lawn (and show up to do the lawn work, without expectation of payment, of the widow next door) rather than a world with endless rules (HOAs) and ordinances. From the get-go, I was accused of the exact opposite… which I take responsibility for, since I obviously could have been clearer in my musings.

Of course: when community spirit breaks down and division sets in and appeals to virtue are not working… then you get ordinances and laws and more sticks than carrots from the government. I actually hate this… even if I (and I assume, when it comes down to it, all of us) agree that it is necessary… we just tend to disagree… vehemently… WHEN it is necessary.

And we disagree on whether it is necessary in this instance. I see Biden as moving towards mandates reluctantly, because vaccine uptake had stalled, and, after a ton of energy was put into persuasion… even to the point of outright bribery…. for the good of the country, we needed to raise the vaccination rates in the short term. Before winter. Before another massive wave of infection. Before our already strained health care systems had to absorb another massive blow.

I reject the idea that all of this boils down to individualism… every individual's choice in the pandemic… to mask, or not to mask, to vaccinate, or not to vaccinate… has ramifications for others. That is not an obsession with power and control on my part (I don't seek to micromanage anyone's life… I can barely manage my own). It is just reality. When the ICU's get filled with unvaccinated patients, other people's surgeries get postponed or canceled. I have seen that happen in my family and in my community. It isn't the case that the unvaccinated solely bear the consequences of their decisions… others are also impacted.

So what I have attempted here… and likely failed… but alas… intentions matter… is call for greater responsibility. Greater civic pride, duty, obligation. Not because of laws… laws are there for when virtue has failed… but because we understand that we are part of our neighborhoods and our towns and our cities and our states and our country. David Garner might detect in here some lingering whiff of totalitarianism… but really, I do not think it is there. It's merely a call to consider responsibilities in addition to rights… not just what are my own individual freedoms, but also what moral (not legal) obligations do I have to others?

I would argue getting vaccinated is in 98% of the cases a responsible act, a mark of good citizenry, and a sign of neighbor love. I freely concede that in a minority of cases, this would not be so, so judgement should be withheld and compassionate responses created.

And I also decry: maybe too stridently… the reality that we face a challenge of a society lacking in virtue… in a political arms race with one side pitted against another… so that immaturity reigns. That is how we get appeals to religious exemptions from one corner… not always sincere… and attempts to remove religious exemptions from mandates from others (e.g. Maine's healthcare worker mandate). It is a zero sum game of power and control. Who is calling for greater responsibility right now?

Tom Nichols, Kevin Williamson, David Brooks… all have made versions of this argument better than I have here. But it is a problem. A big one, if we are going to endure as a free society. A republic needs more than a republican constitution and republican laws… it needs republican values. The same goes for a democracy.

As others have observed, politics are downstream from culture… and the politics of vaccine mandates in 2021 point to a sick culture.

Thank you, Dana. Your explanation is an excellent example of serious and reasoned argument. I hope others will consider it carefully.

Peace, JOHN
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Steven W Bohler on November 27, 2021, 05:00:11 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10249011/Florida-reports-LOWEST-cases-capita.html
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: Dave Benke on November 27, 2021, 07:54:48 PM
I am going to take a step back as say… I agree with David Garner on the importance of persuasion. If you look at my comments from beginning to end, I started with a position that I think is fundamentally conservative… do one's duty, take responsibility for the good of the community. This is an old Yankee mindset (though not limited to natives of New England) that encourages an active citizenry taking an active role in the shaping the community. It is an appeal to patriotism, civic virtue, and old fashioned values.

I grew up in a place where major decisions were made communally in "town meetings," and it is in my bones. For that kind of society, you need a certain amount of seriousness among the populace, a strong community spirit and (unfortunately) a far amount of peer pressure. Not to sound nostalgic, but I actually think a system where you socially chide your able-bodied neighbor for not keeping up their lawn (and show up to do the lawn work, without expectation of payment, of the widow next door) rather than a world with endless rules (HOAs) and ordinances. From the get-go, I was accused of the exact opposite… which I take responsibility for, since I obviously could have been clearer in my musings.

Of course: when community spirit breaks down and division sets in and appeals to virtue are not working… then you get ordinances and laws and more sticks than carrots from the government. I actually hate this… even if I (and I assume, when it comes down to it, all of us) agree that it is necessary… we just tend to disagree… vehemently… WHEN it is necessary.

And we disagree on whether it is necessary in this instance. I see Biden as moving towards mandates reluctantly, because vaccine uptake had stalled, and, after a ton of energy was put into persuasion… even to the point of outright bribery…. for the good of the country, we needed to raise the vaccination rates in the short term. Before winter. Before another massive wave of infection. Before our already strained health care systems had to absorb another massive blow.

I reject the idea that all of this boils down to individualism… every individual's choice in the pandemic… to mask, or not to mask, to vaccinate, or not to vaccinate… has ramifications for others. That is not an obsession with power and control on my part (I don't seek to micromanage anyone's life… I can barely manage my own). It is just reality. When the ICU's get filled with unvaccinated patients, other people's surgeries get postponed or canceled. I have seen that happen in my family and in my community. It isn't the case that the unvaccinated solely bear the consequences of their decisions… others are also impacted.

So what I have attempted here… and likely failed… but alas… intentions matter… is call for greater responsibility. Greater civic pride, duty, obligation. Not because of laws… laws are there for when virtue has failed… but because we understand that we are part of our neighborhoods and our towns and our cities and our states and our country. David Garner might detect in here some lingering whiff of totalitarianism… but really, I do not think it is there. It's merely a call to consider responsibilities in addition to rights… not just what are my own individual freedoms, but also what moral (not legal) obligations do I have to others?

I would argue getting vaccinated is in 98% of the cases a responsible act, a mark of good citizenry, and a sign of neighbor love. I freely concede that in a minority of cases, this would not be so, so judgement should be withheld and compassionate responses created.

And I also decry: maybe too stridently… the reality that we face a challenge of a society lacking in virtue… in a political arms race with one side pitted against another… so that immaturity reigns. That is how we get appeals to religious exemptions from one corner… not always sincere… and attempts to remove religious exemptions from mandates from others (e.g. Maine's healthcare worker mandate). It is a zero sum game of power and control. Who is calling for greater responsibility right now?

Tom Nichols, Kevin Williamson, David Brooks… all have made versions of this argument better than I have here. But it is a problem. A big one, if we are going to endure as a free society. A republic needs more than a republican constitution and republican laws… it needs republican values. The same goes for a democracy.

As others have observed, politics are downstream from culture… and the politics of vaccine mandates in 2021 point to a sick culture.

Thank you, Dana. Your explanation is an excellent example of serious and reasoned argument. I hope others will consider it carefully.

Peace, JOHN

Speaking of serious and reasoned argument/dialog, yesterday a replay of an interview from last year was shown as the Firing Line episode with Margaret Hoover.  It features Cornell West and Robert George, from two very different positions on issues demonstrating mutual respect and, yes, love for one another.  Both are Christians.  Exemplary:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfKMJ99CLTM.  Worth a watch.

Dave Benke
Title: Re: Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses
Post by: John_Hannah on November 27, 2021, 07:59:30 PM
I am going to take a step back as say… I agree with David Garner on the importance of persuasion. If you look at my comments from beginning to end, I started with a position that I think is fundamentally conservative… do one's duty, take responsibility for the good of the community. This is an old Yankee mindset (though not limited to natives of New England) that encourages an active citizenry taking an active role in the shaping the community. It is an appeal to patriotism, civic virtue, and old fashioned values.

I grew up in a place where major decisions were made communally in "town meetings," and it is in my bones. For that kind of society, you need a certain amount of seriousness among the populace, a strong community spirit and (unfortunately) a far amount of peer pressure. Not to sound nostalgic, but I actually think a system where you socially chide your able-bodied neighbor for not keeping up their lawn (and show up to do the lawn work, without expectation of payment, of the widow next door) rather than a world with endless rules (HOAs) and ordinances. From the get-go, I was accused of the exact opposite… which I take responsibility for, since I obviously could have been clearer in my musings.

Of course: when community spirit breaks down and division sets in and appeals to virtue are not working… then you get ordinances and laws and more sticks than carrots from the government. I actually hate this… even if I (and I assume, when it comes down to it, all of us) agree that it is necessary… we just tend to disagree… vehemently… WHEN it is necessary.

And we disagree on whether it is necessary in this instance. I see Biden as moving towards mandates reluctantly, because vaccine uptake had stalled, and, after a ton of energy was put into persuasion… even to the point of outright bribery…. for the good of the country, we needed to raise the vaccination rates in the short term. Before winter. Before another massive wave of infection. Before our already strained health care systems had to absorb another massive blow.

I reject the idea that all of this boils down to individualism… every individual's choice in the pandemic… to mask, or not to mask, to vaccinate, or not to vaccinate… has ramifications for others. That is not an obsession with power and control on my part (I don't seek to micromanage anyone's life… I can barely manage my own). It is just reality. When the ICU's get filled with unvaccinated patients, other people's surgeries get postponed or canceled. I have seen that happen in my family and in my community. It isn't the case that the unvaccinated solely bear the consequences of their decisions… others are also impacted.

So what I have attempted here… and likely failed… but alas… intentions matter… is call for greater responsibility. Greater civic pride, duty, obligation. Not because of laws… laws are there for when virtue has failed… but because we understand that we are part of our neighborhoods and our towns and our cities and our states and our country. David Garner might detect in here some lingering whiff of totalitarianism… but really, I do not think it is there. It's merely a call to consider responsibilities in addition to rights… not just what are my own individual freedoms, but also what moral (not legal) obligations do I have to others?

I would argue getting vaccinated is in 98% of the cases a responsible act, a mark of good citizenry, and a sign of neighbor love. I freely concede that in a minority of cases, this would not be so, so judgement should be withheld and compassionate responses created.

And I also decry: maybe too stridently… the reality that we face a challenge of a society lacking in virtue… in a political arms race with one side pitted against another… so that immaturity reigns. That is how we get appeals to religious exemptions from one corner… not always sincere… and attempts to remove religious exemptions from mandates from others (e.g. Maine's healthcare worker mandate). It is a zero sum game of power and control. Who is calling for greater responsibility right now?

Tom Nichols, Kevin Williamson, David Brooks… all have made versions of this argument better than I have here. But it is a problem. A big one, if we are going to endure as a free society. A republic needs more than a republican constitution and republican laws… it needs republican values. The same goes for a democracy.

As others have observed, politics are downstream from culture… and the politics of vaccine mandates in 2021 point to a sick culture.

Thank you, Dana. Your explanation is an excellent example of serious and reasoned argument. I hope others will consider it carefully.

Peace, JOHN

Speaking of serious and reasoned argument/dialog, yesterday a replay of an interview from last year was shown as the Firing Line episode with Margaret Hoover.  It features Cornell West and Robert George, from two very different positions on issues demonstrating mutual respect and, yes, love for one another.  Both are Christians.  Exemplary:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfKMJ99CLTM.  Worth a watch.

Dave Benke

I just finished watching it again (NJ-PBS). Indeed! Their example could be ours here on the ALPB FORUM.

Peace, JOHN