Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

I suspect Jason reads this and drops nuggets like the religious reopening priority just to see the reaction !

He did mention it on his piece on TV last night but I didn't mention it in the post I made re his comments as I took that part to be wishful thinking on his part given his well documented strong religious beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, G51 said:

Wars being fought over an intolerance of freedom of religious expression does not prove that religious expression is a bad thing. The opposite, in fact.

Pretty much all wars are fought due to some religious wanks intolerance, therefore asking the rest of society to "respect" religion is absolutely wild, IMO. I don't have to respect any of them simply because they believe something. If they want to gather for prayer they can do so when the rest of us are allowed as well. 

5 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

Buddism.

That's not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want an example of religious crackpots you need look no further that this 8 day old report.  Note the last three words of the headline.

Covid: London's Orthodox Jews have 'one of highest rates in the world'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55903096

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

I suspect Jason reads this and drops nuggets like the religious reopening priority just to see the reaction !

He did mention it on his piece on TV last night but I didn't mention it in the post I made re his comments as I took that part to be wishful thinking on his part given his well documented strong religious beliefs.

Would that be known as "trolling" us ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, G51 said:

Then this is a government issue that needs to be resolved. It has nothing to do with the prioritisation of what to re-open first - if the government chooses to deliberately tank businesses, then that's their choice. They'll have to deal with the consequences.

Nowhere did I say that I didn't care.

Absolute rubbish. Keeping businesses forcibly shut has immediate and measurable consequences, whether that's them closing or having to extend furlough. Both of those scenarios are things it makes sense to avoid as much as possible. The only effect of keeping places of worship closed is that people are unhappy about it.

I'm not downplaying the effect that not being able to do the things people like to do has but religious gatherings should absolutely be the same priority as crowds back into football. Not small businesses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gordon EF said:

Nope. It's still not discriminatory, because the rules are still the same for everyone.

It's a fair point about Christmas although the lifting of Christmas restrictions was unarguably far more about the 'secular' side of Christmas, rather than the religious side. It was lifted because people wanted to visit their families and have dinner, not because they wanted to go to a church service.

Laws can be discriminatory because of the effect they have, even if the rules are the same for everyone. In fact, I'd argue most discriminatory laws are so because of this.

Appreciate that Christmas was mostly about seeing family etc, but again, this illustrates that lifting restrictions is about risk management and prioritisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

I would be shocked if they've not been keeping an eye on those figures for all or most of this pandemic, I'd assume that it's an important figure in the projections. 

Yes it will definitely have been used in the projections. For survivors with a long term ICU stay that often leads to a long hospital stay and a prolonged period of rehab. A proportion never make it back to pre-illness levels of fitness. That doesn't just apply to Covid obviously. 

When we get through this pandemic you can be certain that the SICS will produce an extremely detailed report using the critical care data collected. As I said before it's a fantastic data set and it's data which is very much used rather than just gets stored if that makes sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect Jason reads this and drops nuggets like the religious reopening priority just to see the reaction !

He did mention it on his piece on TV last night but I didn't mention it in the post I made re his comments as I took that part to be wishful thinking on his part given his well documented strong religious beliefs.
Here's his latest clothing line !61vFk45DGSL._AC_UY1000_.jpeg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, G51 said:

Then this is a government issue that needs to be resolved. It has nothing to do with the prioritisation of what to re-open first - if the government chooses to deliberately tank businesses, then that's their choice. They'll have to deal with the consequences.

Nowhere did I say that I didn't care.

Hang on, the choice is a place of worship or a non-essential business employing people who are currently furloughed.   You think Govt should prioritise a place of worship ahead of a business, and therefore potentially people's jobs and livlihoods being seriously affected?

That's the choice facing SG over the coming few weeks, and in a secular society it is completely unacceptable if they listen to Leitch and chose the former.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WATTOO said:

The Furlough scheme is actually a bit of a red herring to an extent, basically there's millions now unemployed (and increasing rapidly by the day) who AREN'T furloughed, these people are being handed around £300 per month as opposed to up to £2,500 on the furlough scheme, there's virtually no jobs out there, there's also recruitment freezes on at many of the large employers and things are only going to get worse, with or without furlough.

Nobody likes discussing these things as the current outlook is depressing enough, however, we ain't seen nothing yet !!

Oh I know, because I could be in that situation in a few months.  It's bleak.  However some numpties want a church open first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Burnieman said:

Hang on, the choice is a place of worship or a non-essential business employing people who are currently furloughed.   You think Govt should prioritise a place of worship ahead of a business, and therefore potentially people's jobs and livlihoods being seriously affected?

That's the choice facing SG over the coming few weeks, and in a secular society it is completely unacceptable if they listen to Leitch and chose the former.

 

I think the Government should prioritise the place of worship and implement UBI/furlough to ensure that jobs are not lost. This would mean everyone wins, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hang on, the choice is a place of worship or a non-essential business employing people who are currently furloughed.   You think Govt should prioritise a place of worship ahead of a business, and therefore potentially people's jobs and livlihoods being seriously affected?
That's the choice facing SG over the coming few weeks, and in a secular society it is completely unacceptable if they listen to Leitch and chose the former.
 
This. Places of worship can open when cinemas and theatres can open, and not before.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, G51 said:

Laws can be discriminatory because of the effect they have, even if the rules are the same for everyone. In fact, I'd argue most discriminatory laws are so because of this.

Appreciate that Christmas was mostly about seeing family etc, but again, this illustrates that lifting restrictions is about risk management and prioritisation.

But you're effectively arguing that a law or rule is discriminatory unless it has exactly the same consequences for all groups. That's madness. 

Of course a law can be discriminatory in what it targets, with the rules still being the same for everyone. 'No mosques allowed' or '50000% tax on tampons' are clearly discriminatory in what they target, even though the rules are the same for everyone. 'All places where people gather en masse to be shut' isn't especially targeting any group even though, yes the actual effects of that will not be felt exactly equally across all groups and all individuals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, G51 said:

I think the Government should prioritise the place of worship and implement UBI/furlough to ensure that jobs are not lost. This would mean everyone wins, right?

You know the latter is not possible, the SG does not control furlough or UBI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

G51 is making some reasonable points but Leitch effectively putting religion a par with education for prioritisation is mental.

Religion hasn't stopped during the pandemic, it's just adapted, like many other things.

Forget non-essential businesses for a second. Social interaction with friends/loved ones should come well before religion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...