person0

Members
  • Content Count

    1876
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in Queer sister speaks at 2021 BYU Women's Conference   
    I only read the first two pages of this thread and came out shocked no one shared this connection.  I sincerely believe the brethren have been instructed, as the Lord's servants, that the time has come to let the wheat and tares grow together as we navigate the "winding up scene" during the "latter part of these latter days".

    When wheat and tares grow together, some of the wheat may be starved by the tares, and some of the wheat will be spared by not gathering the tares.  In the end, all the tares will be burned and only the wheat will remain.

    So long as we maintain our number one priority to live in accordance with the commandments of God, and the principles of the Restored Gospel, we will be prepared.
  2. Like
    person0 reacted to Carborendum in CDC - "Racism is a serious public health threat"   
    You're still conflating ideas that are in reality separate.
    COVID affected those communities.  That is the communicable disease. That is what is within the CDC's mission.
    I'm all for racial equality.  I'm all for the equal access to the distribution of the vaccine to all those who want it.  But I don't see anything in the "documented inequity" that you refer to that says "This individual was not given a vaccine because some racist decided that because he's black, he shouldn't get the vaccine before these white people do."  Never seen that.
    Remember, correlating numbers do not necessarily indicate a causal relationship.  That is what a lot of these claims ignore.  They see a numerical correlation that could be explained by a million different causes.  But they immediately jump to racism as the culprit.  Show me that it was indeed due to racism, and I'll be right beside you.
    I know just a few black people in poverty and many black people who are middle class or better.  Guess what?  All the middle class black people had the same access to the vaccine as middle class white people.  And you know what else?  All the lower class white people had the same difficulty getting the vaccine as did poor black people.
    Do you think that maybe it is because poor people tend not to have access to some things regardless of race?  Do you think that maybe poor people in general tend not to have the mindset of getting the vaccine in the first place?
    Could one make an argument that racism may promote poverty?  One could.  Could one then say that poverty affects access to healthcare?  One could.  But the statement from the CDC says that racism "DIRECTLY" affects Black People's physical health.  The reality is that virtually all links to racism are at least a few degrees removed from disease.  But they want us to believe that "racism causes black disease" as a DIRECT relationship.
    We're not talking about water evaporating from the ocean eventually causes our lands to be irrigated (this distant relationship is something I could find as plausible).  We're talking about "I shoot a gun at you and you die." Such a direct, immediate causal relationship is what I find implausible.
    And even if I'm completely wrong.  Even if we found that racism causes this germ to travel to more black people than white people.  And we further find that it was genetically engineered by white people (not Chinese people) to specifically target Blacks, how is the CDC going to cure "racism"?  They can do what they can to treat the virus and the disease that goes with it.  But how exactly does the CDC "cure" racism?
    If you remember how racism was in the 50s and 60s, you know true racism.
    If you remember how it was in the 70s and 80s, you MAY know true racism, and you certainly saw inequalities of opportunity. 
    Yes, it was systemic.  Today, racism still exists.  And it always will exist.  But it is certainly not "systemic".  We are at a point that we've gotten it about as low as it really can be in any earthly, flawed society.  Now the CDC will move away from its mission to work, spending time, means, and energy on getting it to stay about where it is, and possibly make it worse.
    Is that what you really want?
  3. Like
    person0 reacted to Carborendum in CDC - "Racism is a serious public health threat"   
    I think you're barking up the wrong tree here.  I don't think anyone here says that racism has no impact on the Black Community, which has the potential to affect black people's health.  
    The point here is that the CDC is about COMMUNICABLE DISEASES. 
    Since its inception, the CDC has been about these definitions.   But now it is going to be used as a tool for social engineering.
    If you want to defend someone from a racist or sexist who is doing them harm or engaging in criminal behavior against someone else, then I'm right there with you.  I'll march right along side you.
    But take the "racist" out of it and ask if you'd do anything different.  For me?  No, nothing different.  Wrong is wrong no matter who is doing it or to whom it is being done to.  Wrong is wrong.  The "hate crime" to me makes no sense.  Anyone who does something criminal to another person either hates them (for whatever reason) or is so self-absorbed that they don't even think about the other person.
    So, why is it any different when the motive is "racism"?  Why aren't we trying to protect crime-ridden areas no matter what race?  If there is a crime-ridden white area (and believe me there are many around here) why aren't we doing more outreach to that area?  Why doesn't that area get a "public health" flag on them?
    We have interesting ward boundaries.  There are two wealthy areas sandwiching several separate slums.  We minister to several families in that area.  It isn't easy.  They don't have it easy.  But they're all white.  So, the government doesn't care about them.
  4. Like
    person0 reacted to Vort in What, precisely, does a baptism program look like?   
    Yeah...uh...I'm one of those people who thinks "baptismal cakes" should not be a thing.
  5. Like
    person0 reacted to Carborendum in The Shame of Elder Renlund   
    The issue I have with the "disease" analogy in this context is that with sin, there is always a choice.  With pathogens, we often don't have a choice.
    On the other hand, there are often more things we can do to better our chances in each side of the analogy than we often realize.
  6. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Traveler in The Shame of Elder Renlund   
    I think the analogy was perfectly fine and appropriate.  What I find to be somewhat troubling is that he feels responsible for having transmitted the virus.  It seems reasonable to feel devastated at such a happening, but unless he willfully ignored safety measures (against their will or without their knowledge) while also knowing himself to be infected, there would be no reason to feel responsible.  If he feels responsible for something over which he had no knowledge, control, or reasonable ability to prevent, that sets a really bad example to the world.  That would mean there are potentially as many as 500,000+ people in this country who should feel they are responsible for the death of someone who died from COVID-19.  I shudder to think about the implications of all other transmissible illnesses.  All that said, I doubt he considered such prior to making his statement; clearly, his focus was on thoroughly conveying the analogy of a spiritual virus.  🤷‍♂️
  7. Haha
    person0 reacted to Carborendum in The Shame of Elder Renlund   
    with or without the polish?
  8. Like
    person0 reacted to mirkwood in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    NICE!!!
     
     
    Near the dark patch in the middle is where our family has about 180 acres.  My wife and I own one of the lots (about 10 acres).  In the second picture when you zoom in on google maps you can see my truck and my FIL's truck parked near the streambed.
     

     

     
     
  9. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    How much did I pay?
    ~83K (Full plot was double that)
    The whole thing is 31.5 acres.  We own 1/2.  Here's a satellite view.

  10. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    How much did I pay?
    ~83K (Full plot was double that)
    The whole thing is 31.5 acres.  We own 1/2.  Here's a satellite view.

  11. Like
    person0 reacted to Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    That's awesome. I love it.
  12. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    How much did I pay?
    ~83K (Full plot was double that)
    The whole thing is 31.5 acres.  We own 1/2.  Here's a satellite view.

  13. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    I can supply the land if you can supply the money!   Recently got me a nice 15.5 acre plot about 40 min from Independence.  Only 4 minutes from the local chapel too!  🙂
  14. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    I can supply the land if you can supply the money!   Recently got me a nice 15.5 acre plot about 40 min from Independence.  Only 4 minutes from the local chapel too!  🙂
  15. Like
    person0 reacted to Vort in What do you make of the ESG Score?   
    I totally would be if I had the land and the money.
  16. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    I understand data.  When the virus first hit I regularly downloaded the CDC data to do my own statistical analysis.  It appears to me that you may be interpreting more from my words than what is being said, and more than what is meant.  I disagree with the person who made the statement about getting the virus and dying in six months rather than three; I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy.  I think my statement of facts from the beginning is very simple.
    FACT:  Old people have died in response to the vaccine.
    FACT:  President Nelson is within the proper age group to be negatively affected, but as far as we know, has none of the pre-existing issues that would result in an adverse reaction (i.e. death).
    FACT:  It can be reasonably assumed that if President Nelson were to die from an adverse reaction to the vaccine, millions of members would shy away from taking it.  It can likewise be reasonably assumed that the absence of an adverse reaction will soften the hearts of millions who might otherwise be opposed, for whatever reason.
    I haven't said a single thing to suggest the vaccine is bad, or to suggest people shouldn't take it, etc.  You seem to be in some kind of defense mode where every negative sounding statement about the vaccine automatically makes someone an anti-vaxer or something.  I suppose it makes sense given you were part of the trial, but it still seems overblown and inappropriate.
  17. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    Sure, now can you get the people who record all COVID-19 death's to follow that same advice?
    I heard someone put it this way:
    If people are willing to say that about the virus, why change tune when speaking of the vaccine?
  18. Like
    person0 got a reaction from SpiritDragon in President Nelson vaccinated   
    You all do know that the vaccine is only expected to provide protection for one year, right?
    https://www.verywellhealth.com/length-of-covid-19-vaccine-immunity-5094857
  19. Like
    person0 reacted to Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    Well, yes, that was what I mentioned in my very first response -- underlying conditions -- and in each response afterwards. How many people are counted with Covid who had underlying conditions -- as you say -- on their deathbeds, or were extremely old with critical underlying conditions. If you are going to count underlying conditions with Covid deaths, surely one should do the same thing with vaccinations if they are to remain consistent, honest, and with integrity. It is intellectually dishonest to discount/excuse "underlying conditions" with vaccines, while spreading fear with underlying conditions for Covid deaths.
    The link you provided is for Norway that correlates with the link that has already been provided. You still didn't provide the report -- link -- of 35 deaths total for 73.1 million vaccinations. The link previously provided doesn't provide people who had been adversely affected. At least from me typing in deaths, or reviewing the article. It just gives the amount and when the next are coming.
    It appears the vaccine seems to follow the virus itself. People over 75 are high risk, especially if you have underlying conditions. The majority of Covid deaths are people over 75 who were in long-term care facilities. Not only that they counted a man who died in a motor-cycle accident as a Covid death, but this article did mention they actually took the time to remove it. I wonder if they removed it because of the heat, rather than being intellectually honest. Sadly, I believe the former is probably more accurate.
     
  20. Like
    person0 reacted to Grunt in President Nelson vaccinated   
    And that's the issue, really.  Norway, as I pointed out, suggested the risk of the vaccine isn't worth the supposed benefit.   It really depends on your age, condition, and potential reactions to mRNA vaccines.  The groups that appear to have less concern from catching the virus also have less concern from the vaccine.  The inverse is also true.  
    Your closing statement is one of the biggest issues I have with this.  Data is hard to find and information that doesn't fit the message is spun or suppressed.  People refuse to be objective, as we've seen in this thread, even.  

    Fortunately, the DOD isn't making this mandatory.  I've opted to pass thus far.  There are just too many variables.  How often will I have to get the vaccine?  How long does it last?  Is it protection from all strains?  Can I stop wearing the mask since I'm immune?   Can I stop social distancing since I'm immune?  Am I even immune?  
  21. Like
    person0 reacted to Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    This article is the type of backwards talk that has been inconsistent since the beginning of Covid. In this article, it is interesting how they minimize the death correlated with the vaccine with "underlying conditions" but since last year they have been reporting "underlying conditions" and Covid as -- Covid is the worst virus ever. Imagine if they treated these death correlated with the vaccine as they have treated other deaths with underlying conditions? I mean, if the article (once read a while back) was correct they applied a Covid death of a man who was killed in a motorcycle accident.
    Also, if you calculate 32 out of 42000 death that gives you 0.00076% chance of dying from the vaccine (correlation).
    In Utah we have a population of 3.2 million, with about 1600 deaths total in roughly a year now. The total death percentage and likelihood of death from Covid is 0.0005%. That's not very comforting.
    Let's say this remains static, and everyone in the world decided to give in and obtain the vaccine. This potential deaths would lead us to 5,600,000 deaths correlated with the vaccine. More than what has died in the first year from Covid. Just using the same principle that started with Covid in the beginning of this pandemic. At first I heard it had a 10% death rate. If 100 people were found with Covid 10 would die. Then my brother was all about all the research and family texts of 4-5% (fear, run, scare). Now, with actual statistics it is much, much lower. Should we treat these correlated deaths with the vaccine as they treated Covid correlated deaths in the beginning?
    This is why I place very little trust in the arm of flesh. Underlying conditions were seen as Covid deaths (all last year), but now with the vaccine they are giving excuses it isn't the vaccine, they had underlying conditions. It would be nice if things were simply reported accurately, rather than spewing the fear one way, while denying it the other way.
  22. Like
    person0 reacted to Grunt in President Nelson vaccinated   
    One last time.
     
  23. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    I understand data.  When the virus first hit I regularly downloaded the CDC data to do my own statistical analysis.  It appears to me that you may be interpreting more from my words than what is being said, and more than what is meant.  I disagree with the person who made the statement about getting the virus and dying in six months rather than three; I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy.  I think my statement of facts from the beginning is very simple.
    FACT:  Old people have died in response to the vaccine.
    FACT:  President Nelson is within the proper age group to be negatively affected, but as far as we know, has none of the pre-existing issues that would result in an adverse reaction (i.e. death).
    FACT:  It can be reasonably assumed that if President Nelson were to die from an adverse reaction to the vaccine, millions of members would shy away from taking it.  It can likewise be reasonably assumed that the absence of an adverse reaction will soften the hearts of millions who might otherwise be opposed, for whatever reason.
    I haven't said a single thing to suggest the vaccine is bad, or to suggest people shouldn't take it, etc.  You seem to be in some kind of defense mode where every negative sounding statement about the vaccine automatically makes someone an anti-vaxer or something.  I suppose it makes sense given you were part of the trial, but it still seems overblown and inappropriate.
  24. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    Sure, now can you get the people who record all COVID-19 death's to follow that same advice?
    I heard someone put it this way:
    If people are willing to say that about the virus, why change tune when speaking of the vaccine?
  25. Like
    person0 got a reaction from Anddenex in President Nelson vaccinated   
    I understand where you are coming from, but that simply isn't true.  God may or may not prevent His prophet from death at any given moment; it all depends on His plan.