COVID-19 Response: An issue that shouldn't be at all political....yet here we are

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

and you don't know it isn't
but OK, I should have said 'from what I know'

---

Correct on both accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

I agree that’s not the same thing which is why I never said it was. I have multiple posts responding to you that you did not answer that questioned aspects of the discussion, that is not answering.

If you need me to quote just how many times this was brought up by nasty I will. You just not have been paying attention to the thread.

Pointing to other posters also cherry picking isn’t a great example when it’s not related to my issued. Churches having high risk is relevant though. Cherry picking a standard you disagree with on one business compared to another as if that’s the final say is the issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Well, there's also a difference between not answering a question and not answering it the way you want....
Unless I'm wrong, your question you think I've not answered has to do with why I think churches should get special treatment, but when I've said I don't necessarily see it as special treatment, that's been 'not answering the question'. And I've answered multiple times why I don't view it as special treatment, so the circle is complete once again and we're back to Who's on first?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

Well, there's also a difference between not answering a question and not answering it the way you want....
Unless I'm wrong, your question you think I've not answered has to do with why I think churches should get special treatment, but when I've said I don't necessarily see it as special treatment, that's been 'not answering the question'. And I've answered multiple times why I don't view it as special treatment, so the circle is complete once again and we're back to Who's on first?

---

Sure but that still doesn’t address actually not answering lol.

I have multiple posts of questions not answered responding to you on your opinions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Correct on both accounts.

---

fwiw, I had to look back, because I'd thought that WAS what I said...it was one of those situations where I started to say something one way, changed along the way, and didn't go back and proof the whole thing, my bad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mngopher35

Sure but that still doesn’t address actually not answering lol.

I have multiple posts of questions not answered responding to you on your opinions


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Are you and valade like twins or something? :p
Answering a question differently than you want isn't 'not answering' the question.

If you ask me what my favorite pie is and I say I don't eat pie, is that a non-answer where you're justified in continuing to ask the question? Because that's what this feels like.

I've really felt this discussion has just been entirely pointless for pages and pages now because I feel we've all made our stands pretty clear and further discussion isn't going to change anything. But when I've stopped responding, there's posts like this expecting one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nastynice

lmao, ok so someone else initially brought up the SC.

Geez, my bad.

---

Your bad because that infected the entire rest of your recap. If that was so blatantly false, no reason to believe that the rest was any better. And it wasn’t.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo

Did you give him your address?

---

:yawn:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crovash

Too bad for you that the “really good post” is completely misleading and does not come close to articulating the discussion as it unfolded (except in this particular poster’s mind).

As I pointed out, for example, the opening line of his recap is totally false — in point of fact my very first mention of churches as essential is roughly 55 posts into the discussion, and it was only in response to his prior claim that they were “for many people”.

Not surprisingly, the rest of his recap pretty much followed this erronous path.

---

Yeah, either Scoots hasn't read the vast majority of this thread or he's simply doing his best to be a contrarian. Figured he'd know better than agreeing with nasty's steady stream of nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

Are you and valade like twins or something? :p
Answering a question differently than you want isn't 'not answering' the question.

If you ask me what my favorite pie is and I say I don't eat pie, is that a non-answer where you're justified in continuing to ask the question? Because that's what this feels like.

I've really felt this discussion has just been entirely pointless for pages and pages now because I feel we've all made our stands pretty clear and further discussion isn't going to change anything. But when I've stopped responding, there's posts like this expecting one.

---

Except what you do is answer the question "what is your favorite pie" with "a bicycle" and then say "well I think a bicycle is a pie actually". Sure, it's an answer, but you can see people's frustrations when your answer doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps you should evaluate how you engage people if multiple people call you out on similar behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

Yeah, either Scoots hasn't read the vast majority of this thread or he's simply doing his best to be a contrarian. Figured he'd know better than agreeing with nasty's steady stream of nonsense.

---

Imagine my surprise to discover PSD's self described leftist espoused the conservative opinion on this subject...

2020 has really shined a light on many people's true colors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crovash

Too bad for you that the “really good post” is completely misleading and does not come close to articulating the discussion as it unfolded (except in this particular poster’s mind).

As I pointed out, for example, the opening line of his recap is totally false — in point of fact my very first mention of churches as essential is roughly 55 posts into the discussion, and it was only in response to his prior claim that they were “for many people”.

Not surprisingly, the rest of his recap pretty much followed this erronous path.

---

Yeah, I didn't read the 300+ pages before that post. It was far more articulate than usual for nasty so I figured a kudos was warranted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SiteWolf

And that's why I've always talked about striking a balance. I'm not talking about how many lives I'd trade to keep people's sanity kind of balance or even how many lives I'd trade to keep more people employed or businesses open kind of balance, even though in the end that may be part of it. We were never going to be a country that was going to do well under martial law, but I've also brought up the economic law of diminishing returns where, in this case, at what point do the risk factors of increasing restrictions drop low enough the restrictions create more negative impact than the risk they create by not having them.....and that's the ongoing battle and debate.

Easy for me to say, not being claustrophobic but currently spending a lot of time not just at home, but home alone, but one thing that helps me deal with it is to do not just phone calls, but video calls with friends and family once in awhile- just a way to interact without risk. I've even known people to stand in their front yards and have conversations with neighbors who are also standing in their front yards, just as a way to add social interaction with very little risk involved.

---

One of the things that is sort of parallel to this issue but not the same is the protest vs looting vs law and order debate. Saying looting is bad and government is failing to stop it is NOT the same as being against the protests, or as so often been thrown about make one a racist for saying so. Saying a universal lock down has issues of it's own with business and health too is NOT the same as wanting more people to die from Corona.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

In terms of propaganda? You've already proven that you are ill-equipped to speak on that subject, Mr. CGTN.

---

This is a great illustration.

The bell rings, the dog drools. The word china is brought up, your head explodes.

This is called conditioning.

Me and sitewolf both stepped into this convo with no actual opinion and just asked about it. Not on the anti church agenda, heads exploded.

This is called classic conditioning.

Foxnews will condition them the opposite way.

Anyway, I'm telling your guys for your own sake, do what you want with it.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spliff(TONE)

That sucks for her but there must be something else going on and/or she's really letting that claustrophobia take control of her. I'm immune compromised and claustrophobic as well, yet get neither of those side effects from wearing a mask.

---

I saw that Target has a standoff clear plastic lower face mask option for their claustrophobic employees. Guess it's not just my wife.

As someone who has long been blessed with pretty stout mental health I get what you are saying, but by definition people are not in conscious control of their phobias. And not all people experience a named phobia the same way or to the same degree.