4 ms·

>I really wouldn't want to give introductory lectures in a room that seats 250 people and has been in use all day and then find out, like the Reverend Jackson,

>I really wouldn't want to give introductory lectures in a room that seats 250 people and has been in use all day and then find out, like the Reverend Jackson, that the vaccine protection has worn off. Ok then don't? No one is forcing you to go out. Let everyone else make their own decisions. I'm kinda tired of the hypochondriacs forcing everyone else to do what they want. Everyone has access to the vaccine, they can stay in and mask all they want, they do not have to go near people. There's absolutely no reason to be locking down the rest of society. The only argument to keep these restrictions in place is if the hospitals get over capacity and that's not happening.

bmitc 5y ago
> if the hospitals get over capacity and that's not happening It’s happening in quite a few places.
- c0nducktr 5y ago
  Some of these people appear to live in a completely different reality.
  - CountDrewku 5y ago
    Data for hospitals that are over capacity in the US please. Should be easy to find since I'm apparently living in alternate reality. https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization Additionally you need to provide a strategy that would stop this. Since apparently mass vaccination and locking down for nearly 2 years didn't help. Or you can keep supporting the same thing and hoping for different results.
- fidesomnes 5y ago
  no it isn't getting full yes, and sending patience farther away yes, but overflowing and collapse of order like in Contagion, no.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  Show me the data for the US please. https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization
celticninja 5y ago
Everyone can make their own decisions, but can everyone give an introductory lecture? Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? And we are not talking about locking down the rest of society. That was the extreme end of the spectrum when we were trying to get it under control. The only place still with national lockdowns are NZ and Australia because they were able to contain and control the virus earlier on. Sounds like you are equating your experience with everyone. Not everyone has access to the vaccine, not everyone is able to work remotely, some people have to interact with the public as part of their job. Perhaps try looking at things from the perspective of people who are less fortunate than yourself. There is an underlying current of selfishness behind everything you say.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  > Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? If the lecturer is remote, then the 250 attendees don't have the choice to be there in person.
  - celticninja 5y ago
    Big screen in a lecture hall is one option.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  >Everyone can make their own decisions, but can everyone give an introductory lecture? Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? How am I removing that choice? Did I say anywhere they were not allowed to host it virtually if they chose to do so? The only one removing choices is the individual that decides they don't want anyone in person. >Sounds like you are equating your experience with everyone. Not everyone has access to the vaccine, not everyone is able to work remotely, some people have to interact with the public as part of their job. Perhaps try looking at things from the perspective of people who are less fortunate than yourself. Every reason you listed here only supports NOT locking down. Everyone in the US does have access to the vaccine. I am looking at it correctly, you're the one that wants people not to work by locking down everything. What's your solution? Wait until everyone gets it, which will never happen? The irony in calling me the selfish one. I'm not making anyone do anything here. Exactly how is telling everyone they must do something not selfish? Anyone supporting more lockdowns/masking at this point is only doing it for themselves and no one else.
depaya 5y ago
I'm tired of prudes telling me I can't drink and drive. Let everyone make their own decisions. Everyone else can stay home or drive sober if they want, but we shouldn't prevent the rest of society from having fun!
- josephcsible 5y ago
  A better analogy than driving drunk would be driving at all.
  - boredumb 5y ago
    I think the analogy is that there is a small percentage of our population that cannot drive a vehicle without dying and so everyone has to stay home and not drive in order to get rid of the .06% of of the population that will die driving on the road.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  I wasn't aware that you could pass drunkenness through the air with no symptoms. That's new to me. Are you suggesting we should all be responsible for stopping other people from drunk driving and also stopping anyone from getting into a car with a drunk driver? Are you also attempting to suggest that everyone else get should have their drivers' license revoked for the few that are caught drunk driving? That's essentially what masking, forced vaccination, mandated passports is. Might wanna find a new metaphor. I'm sure you think that was an intelligent comparison but it absolutely sucks. You're comparing something that would take a deliberate act to something that might or might not be happening passively to you.
  - depaya 5y ago
    I agree it's not a great metaphor, but my point is that "let everyone make their own decisions" isn't some end-all argument. All rules and laws in society are about not letting people do whatever they want for the benefit of society at large. Also you're trying to appeal to emotion by framing mask wearing as some sort of punishment ("revoking" people's drivers licenses) vs a precaution (like wearing a seatbelt... or not driving drunk). Furthermore, people caught drunk driving DO get their licenses taken away.

bmitc 5y ago

> if the hospitals get over capacity and that's not happening It’s happening in quite a few places.

c0nducktr 5y ago
Some of these people appear to live in a completely different reality.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  Data for hospitals that are over capacity in the US please. Should be easy to find since I'm apparently living in alternate reality. https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization Additionally you need to provide a strategy that would stop this. Since apparently mass vaccination and locking down for nearly 2 years didn't help. Or you can keep supporting the same thing and hoping for different results.
fidesomnes 5y ago
no it isn't getting full yes, and sending patience farther away yes, but overflowing and collapse of order like in Contagion, no.
CountDrewku 5y ago
Show me the data for the US please. https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization https://protect-public.hhs.gov/pages/hospital-utilization

celticninja 5y ago

Everyone can make their own decisions, but can everyone give an introductory lecture? Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? And we are not talking about locking down the rest of society. That was the extreme end of the spectrum when we were trying to get it under control. The only place still with national lockdowns are NZ and Australia because they were able to contain and control the virus earlier on. Sounds like you are equating your experience with everyone. Not everyone has access to the vaccine, not everyone is able to work remotely, some people have to interact with the public as part of their job. Perhaps try looking at things from the perspective of people who are less fortunate than yourself. There is an underlying current of selfishness behind everything you say.

josephcsible 5y ago
> Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? If the lecturer is remote, then the 250 attendees don't have the choice to be there in person.
- celticninja 5y ago
  Big screen in a lecture hall is one option.
CountDrewku 5y ago
>Everyone can make their own decisions, but can everyone give an introductory lecture? Perhaps the 250 attendees can decide if they want to be there in person or remotely, why would you remove that choice from the person giving the lecture? How am I removing that choice? Did I say anywhere they were not allowed to host it virtually if they chose to do so? The only one removing choices is the individual that decides they don't want anyone in person. >Sounds like you are equating your experience with everyone. Not everyone has access to the vaccine, not everyone is able to work remotely, some people have to interact with the public as part of their job. Perhaps try looking at things from the perspective of people who are less fortunate than yourself. Every reason you listed here only supports NOT locking down. Everyone in the US does have access to the vaccine. I am looking at it correctly, you're the one that wants people not to work by locking down everything. What's your solution? Wait until everyone gets it, which will never happen? The irony in calling me the selfish one. I'm not making anyone do anything here. Exactly how is telling everyone they must do something not selfish? Anyone supporting more lockdowns/masking at this point is only doing it for themselves and no one else.

depaya 5y ago

I'm tired of prudes telling me I can't drink and drive. Let everyone make their own decisions. Everyone else can stay home or drive sober if they want, but we shouldn't prevent the rest of society from having fun!

josephcsible 5y ago
A better analogy than driving drunk would be driving at all.
- boredumb 5y ago
  I think the analogy is that there is a small percentage of our population that cannot drive a vehicle without dying and so everyone has to stay home and not drive in order to get rid of the .06% of of the population that will die driving on the road.
CountDrewku 5y ago
I wasn't aware that you could pass drunkenness through the air with no symptoms. That's new to me. Are you suggesting we should all be responsible for stopping other people from drunk driving and also stopping anyone from getting into a car with a drunk driver? Are you also attempting to suggest that everyone else get should have their drivers' license revoked for the few that are caught drunk driving? That's essentially what masking, forced vaccination, mandated passports is. Might wanna find a new metaphor. I'm sure you think that was an intelligent comparison but it absolutely sucks. You're comparing something that would take a deliberate act to something that might or might not be happening passively to you.
- depaya 5y ago
  I agree it's not a great metaphor, but my point is that "let everyone make their own decisions" isn't some end-all argument. All rules and laws in society are about not letting people do whatever they want for the benefit of society at large. Also you're trying to appeal to emotion by framing mask wearing as some sort of punishment ("revoking" people's drivers licenses) vs a precaution (like wearing a seatbelt... or not driving drunk). Furthermore, people caught drunk driving DO get their licenses taken away.