Coronavirus (removal, crime, to live in)

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by blameyourself

My issue would be that this vaccine to a large extent doesn't seem to be preventing people from infecting others. And clearly I'm looking at this situation because it's what my reality is and appears to be a pretty good test since everyone has to present their vaccination status to HR and the building is 100% vaccinated.

I find it impossible to believe that someone that's coughing up a storm isn't more contagious than an asymptomatic carrier. I also think that even if the spread of an asymptomatic disease is universal, I don't think it's a bad thing.

[jbgusa]

Originally Posted by 2020's YouTube Vlog

Good luck, Good heathen, waiting for all this to come to fruition.

So, GH, it's better to keep "(r)estaurants, gyms, airplanes, pharmacies" unavailable to all because they are risky for some? I think not.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Disabled people aren't required to eat at restaurants. How do you think that argument would go over in a courtroom? Some doctors prescribe exercise to their patients. People sometimes need to use airplanes or in-person pharmacies for urgent matters. I think the government or medical board is likely to tighten regulations at pharmacies because they're medical and attract a large share of people who aren't well.

Your argument doesn't hold water. Sorry.

All that you mentioned can be obtained and delivered to your home. Meals, medications and even exercise equipment. In the times we live in now, a person doesn't need to leave their home, unless they choose to and I hope most people would choose to leave it because living like a hermit is a dangerous thing to the mind, body and spirit.

Sorry to say, your argument wouldn't hold up and you'd be laughed out of court or at the very least suggested to seek therapy, which by the way, you can also do online. No more need to see a psychiatrist in person. Isn't that great?

[2020's YouTube Vlog]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

So, GH, it's better to keep "(r)estaurants, gyms, airplanes, pharmacies" unavailable to all because they are risky for some? I think not.

That already happened in NYC.

Didn't work out too well.

Economically it drained the city.

People bailed in droves.

Also didn't get rid of covid.

lose-lose.

[2020's YouTube Vlog]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

Disabled people aren't required to eat at restaurants. How do you think that argument would go over in a courtroom?

They aren't required does not mean they aren't allowed.

They have the right to eat there if they choose.

But forcing non-disabled people to be tested, and possibly turned away, for a small group of people would not hold up well in court.

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

So, GH, it's better to keep "(r)estaurants, gyms, airplanes, pharmacies" unavailable to all because they are risky for some? I think not.

Another person accusing me of saying something very different from what I said.

[goodheathen]

Originally Posted by 2020's YouTube Vlog

They aren't required does not mean they aren't allowed.

They have the right to eat there if they choose.

But forcing non-disabled people to be tested, and possibly turned away, for a small group of people would not hold up well in court.

At least 20% of the adult population is not "a small group of people," not that protections for disabled people require any major percentage.

People with some mobility issues cannot eat in restaurants without major hassle when there are no accommodations. High-risk people cannot eat there without major risk. Both are not reasonable conditions.

Another person's argument is horrible and the flaw is stated in it:
All that you mentioned can be obtained and delivered to your home. Meals, medications and even exercise equipment. In the times we live in now, a person doesn't need to leave their home, unless they choose to and I hope most people would choose to leave it because living like a hermit is a dangerous thing to the mind, body and spirit.
It's also a terrible argument because gym equipment for home has space and cost considerations.

Vaccine mandates were permitted by the courts. Mandated non-invasive testing would be permitted. Temperature checks, anyone? I had one very recently.

The one lawyer completely misread my argument, and it looks like no one else knows much about the law.

People throwing a fit over the potential slightest inconvenience (except testing positive before a flight), when it would have the side effect of driving transmission of the virus way down. I do wonder if the idea would fall apart because there wouldn't be enough manufacturing capacity or raw materials for test kits. If saliva test devices (which might take too long for results) or breath test kits are mostly reusable, it should work.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

All I can add is :


https://up2sd.org/topics/mental-heal...xoCDksQAvD_BwE

For a few on this thread.

Excessive worry or anxiety

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by goodheathen

At least 20% of the adult population is not "a small group of people," not that protections for disabled people require any major percentage.

People with some mobility issues cannot eat in restaurants without major hassle when there are no accommodations. High-risk people cannot eat there without major risk. Both are not reasonable conditions.

Wrong! The ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) require that restaurants must have a serving area that will accommodate a wheelchair. Bathrooms must be outfitted to accommodate the same. So a person who has mobility issues can (and does) eat at a restaurant.

You don't like my answer about exercise equipment? It's the cost and space? Okay, maybe some live in a place too small to fit a treadmill or bench press or elliptical machine but long before exercise equipment became a home luxury, people used to exercise at home without equipment. They even have some nifty DVDs you can pop in the machine and follow along.

You're grasping at straws. The fact remains that you want to live in a society where everyone conforms to your wants and needs. Humans don't like being locked up or told what to do or what to put in their body. Just as with other diseases, you'll just have to learn to live with Covid because, in one form or another, it's here to stay. smh

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Wrong! The ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) require that restaurants must have a serving area that will accommodate a wheelchair. Bathrooms must be outfitted to accommodate the same. So a person who has mobility issues can (and does) eat at a restaurant.

You don't like my answer about exercise equipment? It's the cost and space? Okay, maybe some live in a place too small to fit a treadmill or bench press or elliptical machine but long before exercise equipment became a home luxury, people used to exercise at home without equipment. They even have some nifty DVDs you can pop in the machine and follow along.

You're grasping at straws. The fact remains that you want to live in a society where everyone conforms to your wants and needs. Humans don't like being locked up or told what to do or what to put in their body. Just as with other diseases, you'll just have to learn to live with Covid because, in one form or another, it's here to stay. smh

Just got back from dinner and a movie. Mask free, as was everyone else. Back to normal for most of us. Son goes to a local gym. No masks required, which is good cause they DO... NOT ...KEEP you from getting Covid as has been witnessed.