|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 1, 2020 18:25:48 GMT
Because they ain't control freaks like those godless democrats are who want to dictate what people can do and throw people in jail over it etc. it's never worth screwing someones basic rights over this COVID-19 crap.
sure, it's best if people stay at home but you can't toss someone in jail etc over it. anyone who tries to impose that stuff with force or fines is crossing the line.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 1, 2020 18:32:03 GMT
Because they ain't control freaks like those godless democrats are who want to dictate what people can do and throw people in jail over it etc. it's never worth screwing someones basic rights over this COVID-19 crap. sure, it's best if people stay at home but you can't toss someone in jail etc over it. anyone who tries to impose that stuff with force or fines is crossing the line. Stay at Home Orders don't typically include arresting those who are not staying home. But no one has the right to endanger others. Texas and Florida now have Stay at Home Orders.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 1, 2020 18:56:25 GMT
movielikerI agree. but... the COVID-19 threat is not high enough to take any extreme measures against the common person who's not following the stay-at-home order super strictly. at the end of the day... ones chances of dying from COVID-19 are minimal. so if there was a fairly major threat to the average person then I could see others being really upset if others are not taking it as seriously and put others in danger because of it. but as is, it's no where near that level of threat.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 1, 2020 19:21:02 GMT
movielikerI agree. but... the COVID-19 threat is not high enough to take any extreme measures against the common person who's not following the stay-at-home order super strictly. at the end of the day... ones chances of dying from COVID-19 are minimal. so if there was a fairly major threat to the average person then I could see others being really upset if others are not taking it as seriously and put others in danger because of it. but as is, it's no where near that level of threat. There is no Stay at Home Order because there is a threat to an individual. The threat is to the medical care system. The government doesn't care if you kill yourself. But not practicing self isolation and social distancing puts others at risk. And most importantly, the health care system.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 1, 2020 22:35:17 GMT
movielikerYeah, I get they are basically trying to buy themselves time to prepare the hospitals in advance so if there is a surge on the healthcare system from COVID-19, then they can handle it. but I guess we will find out soon enough whether the country is prepared or not as it seems the surge is going to happen sometime this month, maybe in May tops(?) before things start to level off and scale back. p.s. but what I don't get it it seems some are screwing with people getting access to hydroxychloroquine which makes no sense as if someone is in hot water from COVID-19, they don't have nothing to lose by giving that person access to hydroxychloroquine as even if it does not work, at least they exhausted their options in a attempt to save the person. those who try to stop people from getting access to that are corrupt. because it will either help or won't, it won't make someones situation worse and they say it's supposedly pretty safe in general.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 1, 2020 23:25:12 GMT
movielikerYeah, I get they are basically trying to buy themselves time to prepare the hospitals in advance so if there is a surge on the healthcare system from COVID-19, then they can handle it. but I guess we will find out soon enough whether the country is prepared or not as it seems the surge is going to happen sometime this month, maybe in May tops(?) before things start to level off and scale back. p.s. but what I don't get it it seems some are screwing with people getting access to hydroxychloroquine which makes no sense as if someone is in hot water from COVID-19, they don't have nothing to lose by giving that person access to hydroxychloroquine as even if it does not work, at least they exhausted their options in a attempt to save the person. those who try to stop people from getting access to that are corrupt. because it will either help or won't, it won't make someones situation worse and they say it's supposedly pretty safe in general. You are changing the subject now. You started out defending the governors of Texas and Florida for not imposing a Stay at Home Order. Well now, after more people have become infected and died, and after pressure from other states and the federal government, they have. If they had imposed those orders sooner, maybe more people in their states and outside their states would not have gotten infected or died. ---- ---- This was your first reply; "Because they ain't control freaks like those godless democrats are who want to dictate what people can do and throw people in jail over it etc. it's never worth screwing someones basic rights over this COVID-19 crap.
sure, it's best if people stay at home but you can't toss someone in jail etc over it. anyone who tries to impose that stuff with force or fines is crossing the line."---- They are not "control freaks" by protecting the public's health and life from inconsiderate, selfish morons that continue to not practice self isolation and social distancing. And nobody has the "basic right" to endanger the public. And leaders have the right to imprison and/or fine those who insist on endangering the public.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 1, 2020 23:45:54 GMT
movieliker I am 100% against them imprisoning/fining people for COVID-19 related stuff of not staying home. so while it's best that people generally stay at home, it's taking things too far to imprison/fine them. all they really got to do is just shut down general public gatherings, which it seems they pretty much have, and the rest will play itself out.
basically there is simply not a high enough risk to the average person for anyone to seriously consider imprison/fine level of stuff on COVID-19.
p.s. the only people I would be for prison/fine type of stuff are those people who are a total screw up where they run around coughing on people etc on purpose. but thankfully these types are not really much of a issue even though I have heard it has happened.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 1, 2020 23:55:10 GMT
movielikerI am 100% against them imprisoning/fining people for COVID-19 related stuff of not staying home. so while it's best that people generally stay at home, it's taking things too far to imprison/fine them. all they really got to do is just shut down any public gatherings, which it seems they pretty much have, and the rest will pretty much play itself out. No. In Louisiana, there is a pastor who insist on holding services in a crowded church. He was arrested and charged with 6 counts of reckless endangerment and being a danger to the public. Within hours of being released, he held another service. And promised to continue. And if he is arrested again, he says there was another person ready to take his place. "You can arrest me, but you can't arrest us all." And if his church is chained closed, he'll just hold services somewhere else. People like this need to be arrested and fined. More severe action needs to be taken with assholes like this.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Apr 2, 2020 0:07:41 GMT
movielikerI think stuff like that is a touchy subject as it's trying to curb COVID-19 but at the same time not screwing with peoples right to practice their faith. so while I would agree it's best they wait it out and resume service at a later date (as it's not going to be the end of the world if they have to wait a month or two before resuming service), I think nailing someone over that too hard is a bit extreme because COVID-19 is not THAT big of a threat to the common person straight up. but they are taking measures like it's a major threat to the common person, when it's not. people know the risks, if they want to gamble it's on them especially if these types are generally cautious about where they go outside of church services to help minimize any potential spread to others. because I can see shutting down stuff like beaches etc (since it's not that important) but to force someone to shut down their religion that's a touchy subject and could easily be taken too far.
|
|
|
Post by movieliker on Apr 2, 2020 0:41:07 GMT
movielikerI think stuff like that is a touchy subject as it's trying to curb COVID-19 but at the same time not screwing with peoples right to practice their faith. so while I would agree it's best they wait it out and resume service at a later date (as it's not going to be the end of the world if they have to wait a month or two before resuming service), I think nailing someone over that too hard is a bit extreme because COVID-19 is not THAT big of a threat to the common person straight up. but they are taking measures like it's a major threat to the common person, when it's not. people know the risks, if they want to gamble it's on them especially if these types are generally cautious about where they go outside of church services to help minimize any potential spread to others. because I can see shutting down stuff like beaches etc (since it's not that important) but to force someone to shut down their religion that's a touchy subject and could easily be taken too far. Nobody is threatening to shut down any religion. They can practice online just like schools are teaching classes now. There are church services on TV. The pastor is not God. The church is not God. Anybody can read the Bible, and pray to God alone. When you face your maker on judgement day, He isn't going to care what church you went to. He's gonna care what kind of an individual you were. If you need fellowship, use the phone. Call, text or email somebody. Attend online mass. Or watch it on TV. It's not at all Christian to endanger the public health and life because of your selfish and stupid need to go to mass. God never said, "Go to church." Jesus never said, "Go to church." Nowhere in the Bible does it say to build a church and worship there. --- --- It doesn't matter what people think the risk are. And it's not a personal decision. You don't have the right to endanger others, no matter what you think, feel or believe.
|
|