US Supreme Court on religious service attendance restrictions

Closing the border isn’t exactly sustainable long term. Taiwan has put their entire bet on a working vaccine coming. It looks like Taiwan is going to win this bet, but we had no idea a working vaccine was even possible before.

Taiwan would be in huge trouble is a vaccine wasn’t possible. How would Taiwan “reconnect” with the rest of the world?

“People” should grow the fuck up.

Certainly all of the quarantine measures and robust contact tracing had something to do with it. You can still keep borders open and require negative covid tests, quarantine with some exceptions and contact tracing. We have yet to see if this travel bubble concept will work but seems one of the few paths forward in the absence of a vaccine.

People should stop telling other people to “grow the fuck up” when they do something they don’t like or understand, lest they be told to “grow the fuck up” when they do something others don’t like or understand.

4 Likes

There are still a lot of big questions. I’m also not sure how viable these options you’ve mentioned are in the long term. And we are still waiting to see how the vaccine will work with billions of humans.

Taiwan did a lot of things right, but Taiwan benefited from many advantages as well. That’s all I’m saying.

The thing that everyone seems to be forgetting is that pandemics happen. Yes, people get sick and some will die. It’s not nice. There are things we can and should do to protect the vulnerable, but there are no silver bullets and when large numbers of infections occur, even some young, healthy people will get sick and die too.

The experts who have been telling us that we need a vaccine to go back to normal are now warning us that things might not go back to normal, even with a vaccine.

Basically, we’ve lost our minds. We have individual and collective immune systems that are the product of billions of years of evolution. They work, and we can already see that in this pandemic. It doesn’t mean we won’t have some bruises, but bruises are a part of life on this planet. We will survive this pandemic. Whether we ever get over this collective madness is another question.

Well profiting from the disaster and culling the weak was more important than protecting the weak.

The reset were supposed to give time to identify and treat people. Opening all doors while the tigers are out there is not the solution.

Truly we can agree that the policies have been all helter skelter, a mess, and that is why we have this dumpster fire situation.

When this is over, and a million country men and women are pushing daisies, while millions are damaged for life, will the churches pushing for opening lend a hand?

Again, there is morality and legality. Slavery was legal. Opening up as usual in the worst part of a pandemic is immoral. If the resources allocated to churches, big companies, etc had been partly given to workers, and if the measures to contain contagion had not been vilified, well, the damage would not have been that bad and lasting. Even the worst hit countries in Europe had a brief respite in between closures. But now many parts of the world are seeing the winter of reckoning.

Let the churches open truly but hold them accountable.

1 Like

I don’t think we’re referring to the same thing.

https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/

The response to the virus hasn’t been about saving lives. It’s been about grabbing power.

How long are all the doors supposed to remain closed?

With all due respect, I think you’ve lost the plot with this statement. How in the world is slavery comparable to the notion that government’s don’t have an absolute right to indefinitely and arbitrarily curtail people’s freedoms?

Do you not see the risk in giving governments this right every time they declare an emergency of indefinite and indeterminable duration? This would make slaves of all of us.

How do you figure? Is the virus going to magically disappear? How long are people supposed to subsist on government hand-outs? How long can governments continue to provide for their citizens if their economies are shuttered?

There is limited evidence that the most draconian of these measures actually work as claimed, but again, as I’ve mentioned before, the “measures to contain contagion” are increasingly being vilified because they’re indefinite and the very people enacting them aren’t following them.

Why should Joe Blow lock himself in his room and starve to death while the lawmakers who represent him hold dinner parties in violation of their own rules? More importantly, what does it tell you that the lawmakers aren’t following their own rules?

In what way? Is this a call for some sort of retribution?

2 Likes

The government did very little in the way of hand out to the needy but it had no problem conjuring money out of thin air by the central bank to buy bonds and allowing the rich to get richer in the stock market. The big businesses have been subsisting on handouts just fine while the economy was shuttered.

The chickens will come home to roost eventually in terms of inflation, higher interest rates and taxes later on. As they say, ’ privatise the profits, socialise the losses’
But hey it’s 0s and 1s on a spreadsheet.

And this is what happens every time there’s a crisis, real or fabricated. Which is precisely why it’s foolish to treat government as savior.

3 Likes

IOTW, I have a right to infect other people because of freedumb. Hey, if they add a “Die In A Ditch” clause, where everybody would agree not to clog up the medical system if they have deliberately refused precautions at a bar, a party, a church, or a wedding, great.
As it happens, medical responders feel a moral obligation to treat fools, too.

If you drive a car, you might fall asleep at the wheel, get distracted when a freedumb-loving woman in a convertible Mustang decides to flash you, or spill a hot Starbucks Latte Macchiato on your crotch while switching lanes, causing a massive 20 car pile-up on I-90 that kills 5 people and 4 baby seals.

Solution: government should force you to shelter in your home indefinitely, unless you’re heading to a riot.

4 Likes

But not just any old riot.

1 Like

Right. Has to be a anti-colonial riot where passersby who refuse to raise the fist can be peaceably beaten by peaceful Americans wearing all black.

I mean, who can question that. :roll_eyes:

3 Likes

51 posts were split to a new topic: Natural rights and US Constitutional rights

It’s bullshit that that one guy didn’t get a baby seal.

Again, there is historical data on learning how to deal with pandemic. The virus will not magically disappear when it finds a comfortable petri dish of people to grow in. The idea was to make it uncomfortable for it to grow and expand, contain, give time to create treatments and vaccines. Lessen the damage. Not throw both people and the economy under the bus.

I already gave my tiger allegory elsewhere. Refer to that.

We have agreed the right is there to open up. But the accountability should be there too. If churches become petri dishes, then have backup plan.

Hmm…Where have you been? This case was about Cuomo/de Blasio’s restrictions on large ultra-orthodox gatherings.

I’m surprised nobody’s mentioned Pascal’s bon mot yet:

“All of humanity’s problems stem from man’s inability to sit quietly in a room alone.”

I know this comment is old, but a point of clarification. SCOTUS issued an injunction against the orders based on the potential harm they pose and the likelihood that they would be ruled unconstitutional. The decision on constitutionality is still at the district level, I believe.