[jlisenbe]

Let's suppose unemployment goes up to 25%. Even then the point remains. Most people are still working, so the economy is far from "shut down". People like to casually talk about an "obsession with money", but I haven't noticed any of them having three young kids, a mortgage, and two car payments. Those kind of people see money from a different perspective. We need to get them back to work as soon as common sense allows.

So here we are. The conservative is the one concerned about the welfare of the working men and women. Nothing new there.

[talaniman]

If conservatives were really concerned they wouldn't want people to chance getting sick to make a mortgage payment, they would help them through this rough time until it was safe to return to work or some common sense safety considerations. You got any of those yet? Can you guarantee the safety of those workers?

Stay home until that can be done. That's common sense brought to you by progressive liberals.

[jlisenbe]

No such thing as a risk free life. Maybe we should let those people make their own decision since we do, after all, live in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

I couldn't help but notice that your idea was, as is always the case, for someone else to help out those in need. "Stay in home." That's it? Stay in home in April, May, June, July, August, and on and on. Stay in home until the United States is an economic dead zone and NO ONE can support themselves. Yeah. Great idea.

[talaniman]

Go to work, spread disease, infect coworkers and family, some may die. Yeah that sounds like a plan. Take your own risks, but you have to right to risk others with your looney right wing holier than though half baked desperate ideas.

If we're so great we will figure it out without killing folks or making them sick. Ain'tcha got a bible quote to guide you?

[jlisenbe]

Drive your car to work even though you might be injured or killed in a wreck. Go to work even though someone might have the flu and infect you. The list goes on and on. The risk of contracting CV is high in some places, and very low in others, so maybe we could use a little bit of common sense here. Should we shut down police and fire services? Should we shut down hospitals? All of those people are at VERY high risk. How about grocery stores? Should we shut them down as well? Why do you seem to be OK with asking some people to take risks in order to keep you safe and fed? Why is that? Does it have anything to do with exercising a little common sense?

Funny how a guy who supports abortion so consistently wants to appear to be so protective of life. Deaths from abortions are outpacing deaths from CV by about 6 to 1. You want to suggest we do anything about that, or do you find that death toll to be acceptable?

I can accept that you're trying to be careful here. That's fine, but it's the high and mighty attitude that gets old. I'd be willing to go way out on a limb and predict that when you're behind on your bills and about to suffer financial catastrophe, you'll be at the front of the line of those who want to see the economy opened up as much as is possible.

[talaniman]

1. Common sense tells us from evidence that this disease is highly infectous and easily transmitted and super hard to detect in someplaces. Driving requires seat belts that's the law.

I know small nuances mean nothing to you so you always have ridiculous comparisons.

2. Apples and oranges arguments. Abortions have been around for eons, the virus a few months.

3.Been there done that, might have to do it again.

[Athos]

Drive your car to work even though you might be injured or killed in a wreck. Go to work even though someone might have the flu and infect you. The list goes on and on. The risk of contracting CV is high in some places, and very low in others, so maybe we could use a little bit of common sense here. Should we shut down police and fire services? Should we shut down hospitals? All of those people are at VERY high risk. How about grocery stores? Should we shut them down as well? Why do you seem to be OK with asking some people to take risks in order to keep you safe and fed? Why is that? Does it have anything to do with exercising a little common sense?

Risk is weighed against what is essential. It's called risk management.

Funny how a guy who supports abortion so consistently wants to appear to be so protective of life.

People who are so protective of life as being against abortion, end that protective attitude of life at birth. Thanks to WG for that.

Deaths from abortions are outpacing deaths from CV by about 6 to 1. You want to suggest we do anything about that

I would suggest you not compare abortion and Covid-19. They are different issues.

Everybody wants the economy as open as possible. But not to unnecessarily endanger lives.

[jlisenbe]

Risk is weighed against what is essential. It's called risk management.

That's not what risk management is. RM is the attempt to minimize risk in the pursuit of a desired objective. It is not necessary to have an essential objective.

People who are so protective of life as being against abortion, end that protective attitude of life at birth. Thanks to WG for that.

Would be a good argument if it was even remotely close to being true, but even if it was, it would put you in the position of arguing that it is OK to kill unborn children since, after all, those evil conservatives won't do enough to help them if they are allowed to live. What a crazy argument.

I would suggest you not compare abortion and Covid-19. They are different issues.

They both involve the loss of human life. I would agree that they are different regarding the fact that much is made of the loss of adult lives, but destroying unborn lives is, in your world, no big deal.

2. Apples and oranges arguments. Abortions have been around for eons, the virus a few months.

Don't be ridiculous. Death from disease has been around much longer than abortion. Check out the Black Death. It makes this look like a walk in the park.

[talaniman]

Your propencity to broad brush and compare is fascinating indeed, JL, so no doubt you can always compare apples and oranges without the need to examine the nuanced differences. Bet your sanctity of life doesn't extend to executing criminals does it?

Where do you draw the line at on who can be killed?

[jlisenbe]

Bet your sanctity of life doesn't extend to executing criminals does it?

You can be really funny. You accuse me of mixing oranges and apples, and then you make a statement like the one above. I guess you forgot about those "nuanced differences", sort of like the complete innocence of an unborn child as opposed to the terrible guilt of a child rapist and murderer??? Maybe those "nuanced differences" weren't nuanced enough for you.

I am not in favor of capital punishment.

[paraclete]

I am not in favor of capital punishment.

you are anti abortion so I wouldn't expect you would be but how liberal are you afterall

[Athos]

That's not what risk management is. RM is the attempt to minimize risk in the pursuit of a desired objective. It is not necessary to have an essential objective.

I don't know how you could miss something so blazingly obvious.

Managing risk is simply identifying the dangers inherent in actions compared to the possible benefits of those actions.

Do me a favor. Please DO NOT reply to this. I have no desire to get into an unending useless discussion with you on this topic. Thank you.

[talaniman]

You can be really funny. You accuse me of mixing oranges and apples, and then you make a statement like the one above. I guess you forgot about those "nuanced differences", sort of like the complete innocence of an unborn child as opposed to the terrible guilt of a child rapist and murderer??? Maybe those "nuanced differences" weren't nuanced enough for you.

I am not in favor of capital punishment.

I accuse you of nothing Mr. Sensitive, just put forth an observation. I'm against abortions but I can't get pregnant, nor in control of others opinions or actions and abortions within limits are lawful, despite any ones opinion, or actions. Not a fan of capital punishment, but again not my call.

Indeed we can all have opinions but the laws of the land prevail. Personally, a zygote isn't an unborn child, and big difference between adults who commit heinous acts and lawfully prosecuted. You live in a country where dope and murder is the same punishment, and you can languish in jail for lack of bail money and be innocent of any crime. Inequality is rampant, and makes for much nuance.

[jlisenbe]

I don't know how you could miss something so blazingly obvious.

Managing risk is simply identifying the dangers inherent in actions compared to the possible benefits of those actions.

Do me a favor. Please DO NOT reply to this. I have no desire to get into an unending useless discussion with you on this topic. Thank you.

So you gave an incorrect description of risk management, but I'm the one who missed something? Interesting. Your mistake was not "blazingly obvious", but it was a mistake.

If you don't want to discuss this, then do something else. No one has hijacked your keyboard.

[jlisenbe]

You live in a country where dope and murder is the same punishment

No, Tal, the punishment for possession of dope and murder are not the same. That's the craziest statement I've heard in a long time.

As for abortion, you have the same tiresome position held by a lot of people. You are not in favor of abortion until, of course, someone wants to have one. Then you go into a meaningless discourse about "zygotes", and even at that you reveal that you don't know what a zygote is.

Inequality is rampant, and makes for much nuance.

If you can't see the nuance, (more correctly, a cavernous difference), between a convicted, guilty child murderer and an innocent, unborn baby, then I can't help you.

[talaniman]

You could at least fact checked me. Some states give drug dealers up to 40 years for selling drugs, more if other factors are included. The average sentence for murder is 24 years across the country.

Your abortion peeve is what's tiring here, JL and of course your opinion which may be different from others so stop the holier than thou crap on the subject. Maybe we both live in states that make laws to prevent it, but that doesn't make it wrong, or illegal for others that feel differently. It's disturbing on many levels that you can only affect a segment of the population with legislation, because as I have many times before said a female with resources, has options that you can't touch, so you can only deal with those that are the least among us to perpetrate your crusade. Moreover you have no problem taking those babies who become young kids to jails instead of evaluations or treatments as your approach, which blows the whole thing for me in MY opinion. Why can't I be against abortions without being a raving lunatic about it, or accept that others may not agree with my opinion?

What makes you think I need your help to make my own judgement calls? I understand myself and try to understand you. No biggie to me whether we agree or disagree, but I have certainly never asked for your help about anything. I'm not even trying to change your mind either. The nuance between right and wrong can be quite subjective as well as the motives behind them when dealing with humans.

[jlisenbe]

You could at least fact checked me. Some states give drug dealers up to 40 years for selling drugs, more if other factors are included. The average sentence for murder is 24 years across the country.

First of all, that's not what you posted, and why should I do YOUR fact checking?

Why can't I be against abortions without being a raving lunatic about it, or accept that others may not agree with my opinion?

No one said you had to. But can a person also be against slavery, human-trafficking, murder, rape, or genocide and just casually accept that others may not agree with their opinion? Is that how it works now, that we don't advocate in the court of human opinion that some things are not merely wrong but tragically and despicably so? You advocate CONSTANTLY against Trump and seem to find it kind of hard to accept that others "may not agree with your opinion," but you object when someone stands up for the right of unborn children to live.

What makes you think I need your help to make my own judgement calls?

Never said you did.

[talaniman]

1. A good example of nuance. Just as there are degrees of murder there are degrees of dope. For years and even now the penalty for powder cocaine is different than for crack cocaine. You don't have to fact check me but you could verify what others post. I do, and you do to unless you are lazy or more often stubborn. I swear I think we are speaking different languages or from different planets my friend.

2.Of course they can, most are in fact, but opinions while they can guide actions, are not necessarily a deal breakers in human relationships. If it was half my family would be at war, so accepting those that don't agree isn't likely to mean much when dealing with those human behaviors that may be beyond the boundaries of good behavior or to the greater point ILLEGAL.

3.You said you can't help me, and I said I never asked for he nor needed it.

[jlisenbe]

A good example of nuance. Just as there are degrees of murder there are degrees of dope.

Agreed. And again, that's not what you said initially.

Of course they can, most are in fact, but opinions

So the moral wrongness of slavery, murder, rape, genocide, and human trafficking is subject to differences of opinion? Wow. Well, it turns out we do indeed speak "different languages". I suppose if someone kidnaps one of your grandchildren and forces that child into prostitution, your only protest would be, "I think that's wrong, but that's only my opinion. Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong about that."

You said you can't help me, and I said I never asked for he nor needed it.

I didn't say I couldn't help you. I simply stated that I have not said you needed my help.

[talaniman]

You live in a country where dope and murder is the same punishment

Looks like it to me.

So the moral wrongness of slavery, murder, rape, genocide, and human trafficking is subject to differences of opinion? Wow. Well, it turns out we do indeed speak "different languages". I suppose if someone kidnaps one of your grandchildren and forces that child into prostitution, your only protest would be, "I think that's wrong, but that's only my opinion. Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong about that."

Another nuance of the law, which changed in the case of slavery (But not completely the struggle for civil rights and equal protection under the law which is still being waged on many fronts) after a war was fought and there are laws against the rest as well. Now much of that is also affected by duly authorized members of law enforcement who have their own codes of process and procedure, but for the personal example you offered, I would call a cop but cannot say I wouldn't be subjected to the law and charged with murder for my reaction which no doubt would go beyond protesting it.