Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First, you wanted to stop all flights out of Africa.
When it was pointed out that Africa is a BIG continent, you amended, you wanted to block flights just from Ebola-affected countries.
Now you are talking about just stopping them from entering the United States, not from flying anywhere else.
And you are ignoring the fact that the VAST, OVERWHELMING majority of people in those countries are not infected with Ebola. Banning them because of where they are from, rather than because they pose a health risk, is not thoughtful. It is not logical.
And evidently you missed the part in civics where the United States founding fathers, being wary of mob rule, set up our government restricting the democracy aspect, as the will/majority of the people is often uninformed and irrational.
The fact that this health care worker had contact with Mr. Duncan and then was allowed to fly is unfathomable. We must face the reality that our agencies to do not know what they are doing.
First, you wanted to stop all flights out of Africa.
When it was pointed out that Africa is a BIG continent, you amended, you wanted to block flights just from Ebola-affected countries.
Now you are talking about just stopping them from entering the United States, not from flying anywhere else.
And you are ignoring the fact that the VAST, OVERWHELMING majority of people in those countries are not infected with Ebola. Banning them because of where they are from, rather than because they pose a health risk, is not thoughtful. It is not logical.
And evidently you missed the part in civics where the United States founding fathers, being wary of mob rule, set up our government restricting the democracy aspect, as the will/majority of the people is often uninformed and irrational.
I misspoke, good grief. See my earlier posts where I mentioned several times to only prevent the flights from the affected regions. And I evolved to state to prevent all those with a passport from the affected countries from entering our country.
To simplify.....Correct, ban all people with passports from affected countries in Africa from entering our country.
What you're forgetting is we had ONE person fly into our country that came down with ebola and we are starting to see the potential signs of exposure that is far reaching from that 1 person.
So the majority of people who want flights banned form the affected regions are "uniformed" and "irrational" after seeing 1st hand the results? Good grief.
We have protocols for putting livestock and pets into quaratine and restricting travel why are we letting flights coming in from infected areas ?
Speaking of which, I read that they are not even sure which animals can carry ebola. There may be animals here in North America that can carry and transmit the virus to humans. Also, we don't know what how the winter will impact ebola. We will also have people sneezing and coughing from flu soon. That's a lot of fluids flying around.
And still, the protocol evolved and will continue to evolve, based on lessons learned.
I think I would have completely agreed with you a week ago. But my confidence in the CDC is all but gone. Do you know: they issued 'guidelines' to these healthcare workers to not use public transit. But it was not any sort of enforceable policy. These people were doing self-monitoring. That tells me the CDC are not staying ahead of Ebola. They're reacting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.