 |
Tom, you're so off base here, I'm shocked. I may disagree with you on many issues, but I do think you have a rational mindset.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
WG has given rational alternatives, and 'clete has keyed on the main issue - gathering unnecessarily at a time of crisis.
There's no double standard, and no issue of freedom to exercise religion. You do not have a right to endanger your neighbor.
Why argue these radical interpretations of "freedom" when it is just the spirit of rebellion exercising once again
If you want to make that argument, then that's fine, but the government cannot close churches and open liquor stores. It's ridiculous. And when you have a "virtual" annual physical, then let us know about that.Quote:
But during this pandemic, it's better to be safe than sick or dead. And it won't be forever, just a temporary detour in our worship lives, featuring new, exciting challenges. Yes, medical and psychological/counseling services have also gone virtual.
They certainly had meetings MUCH larger that ten people.Quote:
Church in the early centuries was in small intermate gatherings out of necessity what is wrong with returning to this tradition
SCOTUS and I disagree and I dispute unambiguously your premise that it is putting anyone else in danger . Show me the evidence that even one cluster came from a Catholic gathering. Yes there was a spike in Orthodox Communities that affected only those communities. And those came from outdoor events . The Orthodox do not comply with the rest of the guidelines like masking . AGAIN churches could easily comply as well with existing guidelines given to secular activities. What il duce tried to do was apply unequal treatment under the law ;and SCOTUS called him out on that .
While your congregation complies with the mitigation guidelines and another did not, doesn't the SCOTUS ruling also open the door for the non/less compliant churches to keep doing what their doing, or not doing without checks? We both know you could be doing it correctly and looking good on Monday and have an uptick in cases by Friday, so I assume you are more than willing to adjust as needed in that case.
I'm really done debating this . I note that Chief Justice Roberts who wrote the main dissent ;nor any of the other dissents even mention the objections y'all raise . Their only bone of contention was that there was no need for SCOTUS to hear the case because il duce had tried to weasel out of it .
I'll make a prediction now . For most of the year we have been ruled by the dictates of 50 governors. Many of them have taken on the role of petty dictators .
Just yesterday il duce sent in 40 deputy sheriffs dressed up in police Halloween costumes ,to arrest a bar owner who was desperately trying to keep his business open and paying his employees . NYC they don't arrest anyone ! They give a bench warrant to muggers . But a bar owner got frog marched . This type of tyranny is happening all over the country .
None of their dictates has changed anything . States with strict and laxed laws alike have cases spiking . Monday il duce said he is preparing to shut the state down again ....his Christmas gift to the state . The only thing that has caused that mofo any pause is the threat of court action . Clearly that is the only thing that he fears . And why should he fear anything else ? He has been a disaster presiding over one of the states with the highest mortality rates ..... and he got an Emmy Award for his conceit.
As long as Governors exceed their constitutional authority the courts will slap their a$S down .
Nice rant against your locals and perceptions but my question was, "We both know you could be doing it correctly and looking good on Monday and have an uptick in cases by Friday, so I assume you are more than willing to adjust needed in that case.".
I mean fact is if you're saying do nothing because nothing helps as we spike again to 2500 deaths a day and hospitals full of really sick people everywhere, some action should be taken. I get the frustration and fatigue after nearly a year of this crap and wonder if Joe will do better, but we haven't done much good so far, unless you count airing our politics at each other...which hasn't done much either.
My offer to trade governors still holds.
What are you proposing?Quote:
some action should be taken.
I think it's like being in the middle of a hurricane, and then someone says, "We really ought to do something." Well, good luck with that. I'm sure that masks, handwashing, social distancing, and the like does some good. Travel restrictions no doubt help some, but it all just serves to slow things down a little. That's it. If HC had been elected and was the pres now, there is no reason to believe we would be any better off than we are, but you can be sure she would slowly be destroying the economy. The ONLY reason we see all of this concern is because of one word...Trump. If HC was pres, you would be all about telling us how this pandemic must run its course, and how grateful we should be to have a vaccine about to be let loose.
Politics. Stinkin politics. That's all this is.
Cut the winger talk! The dufus tried the Wilson approach with the same results and I doubt HC would have done what the dufus or Wilson did which was nothing! Now as then we have to get as many people through this as possible until the vaccine is in full scale use. This ain't a hurricane where you have no option but run or ride it out.
Only in winger logic can you have a healthy economy as the population steadily grows unhealthy. That's why the leader of the loony right got booted. He refused to follow the data and act accordingly. That's not politics. That's lunacy.
As is often the case, you guffaw, blander, and bluster, but never answer the question. What are you proposing we do other than what is presently being done?
The only thing you can remember is being blasted since we've been discussing this all year darn near. We went down hill the minute the dufus said the virus would be gone by Easter and we should reopen everything.
And still, we have no idea what action you suggest we take that is not already being done. You're a liberal democrat, aren't you?
Here is what your genius hero is proposing. See if you notice the same two, vitally important missing elements that I did.
https://joebiden.com/covid-plan/?fbc...YE9sFOSMp7P-XgQuote:
- A decisive public health response that ensures the wide availability of free testing; the elimination of all cost barriers to preventive care and treatment for COVID-19; the development of a vaccine; and the full deployment and operation of necessary supplies, personnel, and facilities.
- A decisive economic response that starts with emergency paid leave for all those affected by the outbreak and gives all necessary help to workers, families, and small businesses that are hit hard by this crisis. Make no mistake: this will require an immediate set of ambitious and progressive economic measures, and further decisive action to address the larger macro-economic shock from this outbreak.
Biden believes we must spend whatever it takes, without delay, to meet public health needs and deal with the mounting economic consequences.
You should explain your own point yourself. While you're at it, respond to my initial premise "We went down hill the minute the dufus said the virus would be gone by Easter and we should reopen everything.", of which I can add more failures and incompetence the least of which being despite full knowledge of a fall resurgence of the virus, the dufus is focused on conspiracy theories and overturning election results, illegally, and unsubstantiated and while sickness and death reach new heights he engages in chaos and obstruction.
2,770 deaths just yesterday and you start in on Biden who hasn't even been sworn in yet?
like Quid and the emperor were so stellar when dealing with H1N1
Ron Klain, who was Quid's chief of staff at the time sais, “It is purely a fortuity that this isn’t one of the great mass casualty events in American history” “It had nothing to do with us doing anything right. It just had to do with luck. If anyone thinks that this can’t happen again, they don’t have to go back to 1918, they just have to go back to 2009, 2010 and imagine a virus with a different lethality, and you can just do the math on that.”
H1N1 infected 60 million Americans .It just wasn't as lethal as previous swine flu events like 1918 .
One of the big differences was that Bush had supplied the emergency stockpile . The emperor and Quid depleted and did not restock . If H1N1 had been as lethal as covid ,we would've seen 2 million Americans dead .
But no one knew it at the time . Did the emperor and Quid act decisive ? Except for emptying the strategic supplies ;no . Did they close the border even as they knew the origin was in Mexico ? No . Did they close schools even though it was kids that were the highest risk of death ? No . Were there lock downs ? No. The emperor got away with saying he would try to control the impact of the virus ... not control the virus .
Vaccine ..... it is easier to create a flu vaccine than a new strain of covid . The emperor promised 100 million doses by fall in anticipation of a 2nd wave . Only 11 million were produced . By that time 22 million Americans had been infected .
[America would've been better off in just acknowledging(as Democrats once did ) that there is only so much a government can do to control a germ.
Quid lucks out . He comes in at the tail end of a pandemic; when a number of vaccines will be coming on the market and the distribution system will have been set up by a man who's business before he became President was to manage the distribution chain of a number of large projects at the same time .
But Quid will get the credit much like the emperor got a Peace Prize nomination 11 days after he was inaugurated (he made a couple of hate America speeches overseas which secured his selection) .
Well, I'll give this. At least you are consistent. When asked the very simple question of what you would suggest we do that is not already being done, you have twice now passed on giving an answer, and instead you have resorted to your usual fall-back position of, "I hate D. Trump!"Quote:
You should explain your own point yourself. While you're at it, respond to my initial premise "We went down hill the minute the dufus said the virus would be gone by Easter and we should reopen everything.", of which I can add more failures and incompetence the least of which being despite full knowledge of a fall resurgence of the virus, the dufus is focused on conspiracy theories and overturning election results, illegally, and unsubstantiated and while sickness and death reach new heights he engages in chaos and obstruction.
I think Trump is certainly open to criticism of how he managed the virus in the spring, but since then we have tested far more people than any other nation, and we are presently rolling out a vaccine and doing so before just about anyone else other than, as far as I know, the Brits. So since you are so quick to criticize D.J.T., I'm sure that in a sense of true fairness you will credit him for those two accomplishments. Right?? And as well you will notice, I'm sure, the very positive jobs data for November which came out a good bit better than expected.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/06/econo...ort/index.html
In the meantime, our pres elect is rolling out a plan which promises goodies to everyone with no price tag attached. There is no price tag because of the very simple reason that there is no intention of paying for any of it. We'll just borrow a few tril more, and keep on trucking to the edge of the cliff.
Very true. Trump did more to secure peace than Obama ever thought about doing.Quote:
But Quid will get the credit much like the emperor got a Peace Prize nomination 11 days after he was inaugurated (he made a couple of hate America speeches overseas which secured his selection) .
Meanwhile, it appears that the famous porn author, Stacey Abrams, a person that WG would certainly characterize as "fat", has sponsored one of the groups accused of voter fraud in Georgia.
"The group, The New Georgia Project, was founded by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams to help register new voters. Ultimately, the 2014 investigation found no wrongdoing by the group, but did cite 14 people for forging 53 voter applications. All those cited were working as independent contractors, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
On Wednesday, Raffensperger announced an investigation into several progressive organizations he alleged “sought to register ineligible, out-of-state, or deceased voters” for the Jan. 5 Senate runoff elections. Among those named are Vote Forward, The New Georgia Project, Operation Voter Registration GA and America Votes."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/geo...s-what-we-know
JL, WG LOVES Stacy Abrams!!!!
You love fat, porn authors??? I'm surprised.
You've just given me a new author! Thank you!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Oops, I've already discovered her. I have a couple of her books on my Kindle, but haven't read them yet. Now I know what I'll be doing this weekend. And it's soft porn, not the stuff you used to read in bed -- with your flashlight under the covers.
I guess it's your genre. We KNOW you read porn because you just admitted to it, and it would be a strange thing to testify to on a message board, but I guess that's how liberal dems do things? Sorry to disappoint you, but I did not. Now that was largely because I had no access to it, and for that I am eternally grateful. But I'm just glad to read that you now admit it is porn. A few months ago you tried to suggest it was not, perhaps believing it ranked up there with Shakespeare?
One thing I believe we can say for sure. If DJT had written it, you would call it porn with a capital P, but since you don't despise SA, then it is "soft" porn. Is it "soft" porn only when liberal dems write it? Is that how you determine the difference?
I'm not a liberal Dem.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Apparently, you've never read soft porn -- or you did and yawned. It ain't stimulating and visual, is usually emotional. Many romance novelists incorporate soft porn in their stories.Quote:
But I'm just glad to read that you now admit it is porn. A few months ago you tried to suggest it was not, perhaps believing it ranked up there with Shakespeare?
Donnie couldn't write his way out of a paper bag. That's why his daddy had to pay his way through school.Quote:
One thing I believe we can say for sure. If DJT had written it, you would call it porn with a capital P
Sure it is. If anyone's interested, here are some samples of SA's "literary" efforts. Practically everyone, I imagine, regard graphic descriptions of people having sex to be porn, unless a person is a committed liberal democrat apologist.Quote:
Apparently, you've never read soft porn -- or you did and yawned. It ain't stimulating and visual, is usually emotional. Many romance novelists incorporate soft porn in their stories.
https://thefederalist.com/2018/11/02...omance-novels/
And how many pages out of the total pages does her soft porn take up in one of her romance novels?
You forbid me and others to read soft porn in romance novels? No sex. The bedroom door gets closed when it's time for sex, and the reader is left alone in the hallway.
Check out romances by Elizabeth St. Michel. She and I both grew up in a tiny German farming community in western NY.
https://elizabethstmichel.com
First you called it soft porn. Now you call it "romance". Hmmm.Quote:
And how many pages out of the total pages does her soft porn take up in one of her romance novels?
I have not forbidden you or anyone else to do anything. I have simply pointed out that you read it. In fact, you pointed that out yourself.Quote:
You forbid me and others to read soft porn in romance novels? No sex. The door gets closed when it's time for sex.
I have no intention to read porn, soft or otherwise.Quote:
Check out romances by Elizabeth St. Michel. She and I both grew up in a tiny German farming community in western NY.
Look, read what you want. It's none of my business. In fact, you are the one who seemed to be bragging about reading "soft porn" and thus brought the subject up of what you read. One way or the other, you are free to do what you want, but if you start this nonsense about wanting Trump out because of his many foolish sexual remarks, I'm going to point out every time your support of a porn author who would seem to be involved in voter fraud. The pot should not call the kettle black.
Then stop hassling me.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about.Quote:
but if you start this nonsense about wanting Trump out because of his many foolish sexual remarks, I'm going to point out every time your support of a porn author who would seem to be involved in voter fraud. The pot should not call the kettle black.
Is the dufus "grab 'em by the p****y" porn talk, or is he the pot or the kettle, even if he ain't black? Could he be a liberal democrat? Or do you accept the dufus crap because he gives YOU something in return?
And there it is. If Trump makes a vulgar comment, then it must be hashed and rehashed endlessly. If Biden is very believingly accused of sexual assault, that gets swept under the rug. So it all still comes down to politics.Quote:
Is the dufus "grab 'em by the p****y" porn talk, or is he the pot or the kettle, even if he ain't black? Could he be a liberal democrat? Or do you accept the dufus crap because he gives YOU something in return?
I haven't hassled you, WG. You have bragged about reading what you said is porn. Perhaps you are hassling yourself?Quote:
Then stop hassling me.
Trump has made numerous vulgar comments and carried on a number of lewd activities, all of which he's publicly bragged about.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I bragged about it??? I have explained to you the difference between porn and soft porn. You are not a comprehensive readerQuote:
I haven't hassled you, WG. You have bragged about reading what you said is porn. Perhaps you are hassling yourself?
Yeah. Here's your bragging. "You've just given me a new author! Thank you!!!Quote:
I bragged about it??? I have explained to you the difference between porn and soft porn. You are not a comprehensive reader.
Oops, I've already discovered her. I have a couple of her books on my Kindle, but haven't read them yet. Now I know what I'll be doing this weekend. And it's soft porn..."
Basically, if you read it, then you seem to believe it surely must be some form of porn called "soft porn". Isn't that kind of like saying a person only engages in "soft racism", or he/she only engages in "soft sexual assault"? I don't like exposing myself to those thoughts and mental images, so I avoid it. But you can read what you like. You told everyone you read porn (soft porn) and now you seem sensitive about. I don't want to concern myself with it since it is really your business and not mine. Let's just drop it.
You said it was porn. I corrected you and explained the difference between porn and soft porn. You refuse to see the difference. Playmate magazine is porn. X-rated movies usually include porn. Sorry you don't know what porn is.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Yep politics and COURT CASES!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
List of Trump's accusers and their allegations of sexual misconduct - ABC News (go.com)
Credible EVIDENCE before a judge doesn't get swept under a rug. What do you think the dufus is still raising money for?
Trump’s ‘Save America’ PAC Could Pay For Big Macs, Hush Money … Pretty Much Anything (yahoo.com)
PS
Sorry haven't finished reviewing the civil case against the dufus family for the inauguration...!
Since you are the one who reads it, then I suppose you think you get to set the definitions. Sorry. I won't fall for that one. It's like allowing a white supremacist to decide what soft racism is.Quote:
You refuse to see the difference. Playmate magazine is porn. X-rated movies usually include porn. Sorry you don't know what porn is.
But for the third time, do as you please. If you don't want everyone to know, then don't announce it on a message board.
Hey, Tal. Don't forget about your hero, the pres elect.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/8-wom...riate-touching
You're still sooooo confused!Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
I also read westerns, fantasies, general fiction, thrillers, mysteries, and YA novels. Btw, the definitions of porn and soft porn are google-able.
Soft porn is still porn and is based on vivid descriptions of sex. Your definition is basically that if you read it, and if it's written by a liberal dem, then it must be OK. Well, I've read samples of SA's work, and yeah, it's porn. I suppose you get a kick out of it, or whatever, but as for what you read, for the fourth time, it's strictly your business and I see no reason why we need to discuss it here other than you continue to bring it up in a vain attempt to make your reading of porn, and your support of a porn author, to seem OK.Quote:
I also read westerns, fantasies, general fiction, thrillers, mysteries, and YA novels. Btw, the definitions of porn and soft porn are google-able.
BTW, I understand the difference between porn and soft porn. I just don't find it to be meaningful since they are both based on alluring descriptions of sex. It's like saying there is a difference between being drunk versus only soft drunk. And what SA writes is pretty detailed and descriptive in any case, or at least the samples I have looked at certainly are. I would not be able to read a book like that and have any sense that God found my doing so to be pleasing in His sight.
Do you think your God is pleased with your support of a nasty talking fellow who lears at naked young girls?
I don't support Biden. You know, the guy accused by eight women of sexual assault?
Look, you and I both know that we had two choices in the last two elections, and those were bad and mediocre. So I went with the guy who opposed abortion and promised to appoint fed judges who valued the Constitution. So yes, I think it pleases God immensely to stand against the murder of innocent, unborn human beings. Your playing the part of Mr. Pot to my Mr. Kettle gets tiresome.
hmmm SCOTUS and porn . In the words of Justice Potter Stewart :
"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..."
Forget the cookware dude, are you not concerned about almost 3,000 deaths a day, and that's not counting what the toll will be when the holiday numbers are realized. Your personal peeves pale when you look at a big picture and it's disgusting your concern is making sure the dufus gets credit for his incompetence that leads to those rapidly rising numbers of sickness and death.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Not to mention the continuing erosion of the economy by covid.
3K deaths a day? How appropriate that that number is about the number of abortions a day that you couldn't care less about. Well, I've asked you twice as to what else we should be doing that is not presently being done about Covid, and you've passed on the question both times. We test more people by far than any other country, and we have developed a vaccine in record time. I'm sure you've just forgotten to give Trump credit for that, and recognized how many lives have been saved, and will be saved, by those two measures?Quote:
Forget the cookware dude, are you not concerned about almost 3,000 deaths a day, and that's not counting what the toll will be when the holiday numbers are realized. Your personal peeves pale when you look at a big picture and it's disgusting your concern is making sure the dufus gets credit for his incompetence that leads to those rapidly rising numbers of sickness and death.
As to the economy, you are clearly not paying attention in even the smallest measure.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:41 AM. |