O_U812 Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 4 hours ago, Nicholas said: All survived. Even some that were elderly and some that were overweight and some that had underlying health issues. Throughout human history, mankind has always faced hurdles that subjected many of unfortunate individuals of humanity to many unfortunate and terrible circumstances and situations, including plagues and diseases in the past. Even at times in the past where many suffered and succumed to deadly plagues and viruses long before science and medical technology was as advanced as it is in modern times. Yet, mankind has always found ways to persevere and move on and get past everything that had unfortunate and profound effects on many of the worlds populations. It's no doubt that covid19 is a highly contagious virus, but it is also a virus that is only lethal to a very small percentage of the overall population and it is a truly unfortunate and terrible plague besides being sad relating to those that it has been, and will yet be lethal to. But, mankind cannot bury their heads like Ostriches when afraid, by continuing to implement and enforce lockdowns that destroy and take many peoples lives in other ways that the virus itself does not. Everyone must do their own part by wearing appropriate facial coverings and maintaining appropriate social distancing when necessary, along with maintaining proper individual hygiene in individual efforts to combat the virus until an efficient and reliable vaccine is completed and distributed throughout the worlds populations. 230,000 + have not survived. That's the bottom line. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nagachilli2 Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 4 hours ago, Nicholas said: Everyone must do their own part by wearing appropriate facial coverings and maintaining appropriate social distancing when necessary, along with maintaining proper individual hygiene in individual efforts to combat the virus Yes I totally agree...There's just 1 problem...some don't 😒 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robwin Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 7 minutes ago, nagachilli2 said: Yes I totally agree...There's just 1 problem...they don't 😒 You only have to see all the demonstrations, protests and social gatherings over here in the UK and then everyone wonders why the toll count is rising, unbelievable. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicholas Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 55 minutes ago, O_U812 said: 230,000 + have not survived. That's the bottom line. Of course any loss of life from any virus is one too many. Out of an estimated overall population of over 330,000,000 + people, 230,000 is less than .01 %. As unfortunate as it is, more will likely die before an efficient and reliable vaccine is completed and distributed amongst the overall population that add more protection to those more vulnerable to developing serious or worse health conditions or issues or even from dying from contracting the virus. In the mean time, people cannot be expected to stay at home or anywhere else and not work to be able to support themselves and their families. People need to be vigilant and adhere to common sense rules and guidelines of wearing appropriate face coverings when out in public or near more than a couple of other people, and to maintain appropriate distancing when away from home or out in public, and for those that refuse to, there should be stiff fines imposed on first offenses, afterwards, they should face incarceration for awhile. Besides that, people need to engage in individual hygiene practices more than ever before. But people cannot be expected to always remain in place somewhere while the lives of their families besides themselves fall apart because of other reasons not directly caused by the virus, but indirectly so, along with communities, cities and townships, states, and even the country as a whole falls apart and collapses around them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 On 10/14/2020 at 10:56 AM, nagachilli2 said: I'm sure there must've been 1 or 2 normal guys in the thousands that attended the circus...you know, like Ridge 😏 LMAO!!! Quote of the month!!! Priceless!!! 👍🤣🤣🤣👍 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 On 10/14/2020 at 2:55 PM, Ridgerunner said: One of your typical tactics. You use other people's words to express your ideas, and then claim that you didn't say it when someone calls you out on the comment. You are so phony, deceitful, and gutless. You have a very short attention span and memory. Let me help. No tactics in play here. I can't and won't take credit for someone else's words. That's called plagiarism. So, I only quoted the words of someone else. I did refute your claim that I spoke the words, because they weren't my words. I also said, explicitly, that I did agree with them, or I wouldn't have posted them. No tactics, just truth. Something you have a BIG problem with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 On 10/14/2020 at 3:07 PM, Ridgerunner said: Being an originalist means that a justice makes decisions based upon the original intent of the written text of the Constitution and laws. If ACB were a true originalist, she couldn't be a Supreme Court Justice. She couldn't enter into contracts, or own property in her name, or have equal rights, or even vote. That's true originalism. On 10/14/2020 at 3:37 PM, Ridgerunner said: Being an originalist means interpreting the constitution and law as they are written and not seeing things that are not there in order to fit a justice's personal ideological agenda. That's not quite true. "In the context of United States law, originalism is a concept regarding the interpretation of the Constitution that asserts that all statements in the constitution must be interpreted based on the original understanding "at the time it was adopted". Wikipedia" And, even though that second part, "...not seeing things that are not there in order to fit a justice's personal ideological agenda," doesn't even enter into it, I'm sure ACB intends to use her "originalist" thinking in just that manner, to suit her and/or her party's agenda. Having said that, how would it even be possible for anyone, originalist or otherwise, to "...interpret the Constitution based on the original understanding "at the time it was adopted"? Who can know the minds of men who have been dead 200+ years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 27 minutes ago, letsdothis said: If ACB were a true originalist, she couldn't be a Supreme Court Justice. She couldn't enter into contracts, or own property in her name, or have equal rights, or even vote. That's true originalism. That's not quite true. "In the context of United States law, originalism is a concept regarding the interpretation of the Constitution that asserts that all statements in the constitution must be interpreted based on the original understanding "at the time it was adopted". Wikipedia" And, even though that second part, "...not seeing things that are not there in order to fit a justice's personal ideological agenda," doesn't even enter into it, I'm sure ACB intends to use her "originalist" thinking in just that manner, to suit her and/or her party's agenda. Having said that, how would it even be possible for anyone, originalist or otherwise, to "...interpret the Constitution based on the original understanding "at the time it was adopted"? Who can know the minds of men who have been dead 200+ years? You study all the writings of those leaders to understand their thinking at the time the Constitution was adopted. That's what real Constitutional scholars do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgerunner Posted October 27, 2020 Share Posted October 27, 2020 1 hour ago, letsdothis said: You have a very short attention span and memory. Let me help. No tactics in play here. I can't and won't take credit for someone else's words. That's called plagiarism. So, I only quoted the words of someone else. I did refute your claim that I spoke the words, because they weren't my words. I also said, explicitly, that I did agree with them, or I wouldn't have posted them. No tactics, just truth. Something you have a BIG problem with. Wow, I must have really gotten under your dishonest thin skin. I made that comment on Oct.14 and you've been stewing on it ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyone Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 4 hours ago, letsdothis said: LMAO!!! Quote of the month!!! Priceless!!! 👍🤣🤣🤣👍 Just now responding to 3 posts from 10/14/2020--you must have been in quarantine--glad you made it 😏 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBG 150 Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 It just takes that long to wade through all of the bullshit posted here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
letsdothis Posted October 28, 2020 Share Posted October 28, 2020 11 hours ago, Ridgerunner said: Wow, I must have really gotten under your dishonest thin skin. I made that comment on Oct.14 and you've been stewing on it ever since. I replied to it the same day I read it. Yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts