Open (More or Less) Post on Covid 5
Sep. 7th, 2021 12:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ecosophia
The semi-open posts I've hosted here on the Covid-19 narrative, the inadequately tested experimental drugs for it, and the whole cascading mess surrounding them have continued to field a huge number of comments, so I'm opening another space for discussion. The rules are the same as before: 1. If you plan on parroting the party line of the medical industry and its paid shills, please go away. This is a place for people to talk openly, honestly, and freely about their concerns that the party line in question is dangerously flawed and that actions being pushed by the medical industry et al. are causing injury and death. It is not a place for you to dismiss those concerns. Anyone who wants to hear the official story and the arguments in favor of it can find those on hundreds of thousands of websites.
2. If you plan on insisting that the current situation is the result of a deliberate plot by some villainous group of people or other, please go away. There are tens of thousands of websites currently rehashing various conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 outbreak and the vaccines. This is not one of them. What we're exploring is the likelihood that what's going on is the product of the same arrogance, incompetence, and corruption that the medical industry and its tame politicians have displayed so abundantly in recent decades. That possibility deserves a space of its own for discussion, and that's what we're doing here.
3. If you don't believe in treating people with common courtesy, please go away. I have, and enforce, a strict courtesy policy on my blogs and online forums, and this is no exception. The sort of schoolyard bullying that takes place on so many other internet forums will get you deleted and banned here. No, I don't care if you disagree with that: my journal, my rules.
With that said, the floor is open for discussion.
Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-09 08:51 pm (UTC)https://frenchpress.thedispatch.com/p/its-time-to-stop-rationalizing-christian
French appeals to his fellow evangelicals to take the vaccine, writing that there is no religious liberty interest in refusing the COVID vaccine. “To the extent that he or she takes risks, those risks should be on behalf of others,” he says. “As a person created in the image of God, taking care of yourself is an independent good. Taking care of yourself so that you can care for others is an even nobler good.”
He quotes Martin Luther, writing during a plague, who said:
“Therefore I shall ask God mercifully to protect us. Then I shall fumigate, help purify the air, administer medicine, and take it. I shall avoid places and persons where my presence is not needed in order not to become contaminated and thus perchance infect and pollute others, and so cause their death as a result of my negligence.... If my neighbor needs me, however, I shall not avoid place or person but will go freely....”
Quite often on this website we talk about “Covid hysteria.” When I read French’s article, I don’t catch any hint of hysterical thinking. What I do find is a reasonable man thinking deeply about religious principles, and RELYING ON A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF FACTS than the facts presented in this current thread.
David French thinks the vaccine will help the people who take it and the people around them. In Covid Post 5, we are talking among ourselves about many ways the vaccine may harm people who take it, now and perhaps for years to come. He hasn’t heard this conversation; it hasn’t reached him. He is making the best decisions he can based on the facts he has.
It might be useful for us to sometimes remember that the people who have a different opinion about the vaccines are working from a different set of facts. We hope/expect that over the next 12 months the real facts will become clearer.
Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-09 09:30 pm (UTC)Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-09 09:42 pm (UTC)Beyond there existing separate sets of "facts", there exists a belief within much of society that vaccination is something like a holy sacrament. Simply calling something a "vaccine" imbues it with imagery of hope and progress and faith in technology and victory over smallpox and polio.
We hold no such collective beliefs about the words "drug" and "treatment" because we have seen plenty of messy failures and evidence of corruption alongside life-saving successes. But "vaccine" remains as-yet untainted and untouchable in the collective psyche. Vaccines Save Lives.
That could all change in the months ahead, but I think it is fair to say that there is a great deal of faith bolstering the limited "facts" and papering over the known and unknown risks at this time.
Mark L
Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-09 11:29 pm (UTC)But how should we factor in requirements for basic curiosity and open mindedness? I have no idea where the facts will sort themselves out in the end. With the obfuscation going on, we may never know the true facts. But this whole episode feels a lot like the WMD issue many years ago now. I was a young dumb kid at the time, but even I could read a handful of articles on the early internet and rub two neurons together and say "something doesn't add up. Maybe we should pause and reflect before we enter a couple forever wars". This feels so similar. While I recognize the good will and concern coming from the monolithic wall of the vaccine shaming crowd, I also recognize it's coming from an incurious place. Which is very bothersome and off-putting.
Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-10 11:31 pm (UTC)I find myself at a stage of life where my time is limited. I have two questions where I will need information about Covid (not right now, but at specific times when I need to make choices.) It would take me many hours to follow the available, constantly changing flow of information, and I'm choosing to use that time in other ways. I'm very thankful I can turn to more informed people on this website for educational summaries, or when I have specific decisions to make.
It seems to me that:
1) people vary widely in their general level of curiosity
2) people vary widely in what they choose to focus on
3) many people find their lives filled with daily living, cooking dinner, getting the kids to bed on time, etc. etc. etc.
4) some people are attracted to exploring hidden levels of reality... hidden secrets about history, or about powerful people, or corporate misdeeds, etc.
5) some people prefer to believe that most people have good intentions. There will be situations where unpleasant truths are forced upon them, but they don't seek them out.
So, some people are just generally incurious people. Other people are curious about the batting averages in the major leagues, or the genetic history of modern fuchsia plants, or recipes for the best keto-adapted desserts. Some are curious about the history of Covid, the ways different nations have responded to Covid, and the advantages and disadvantages of various responses. Some people are able to do cutting-edge, in-the-moment research, while others plan to wait until someone else writes a book, or at least a summary using familiar words.
It takes all kinds!
Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-09 09:43 pm (UTC)Another reason for me to suspect that the theory of the daemon possession proposed by JMG is true, daemons always used well meaning fool spiritual teachers to advance their reach.
https://ecosophia.dreamwidth.org/145097.html?thread=18149065#cmt18149065
From a scientific point of view it doesn't make sense asking religious leaders to vouch for something they are not specialized into. Some Romanian clergy said: Why are you asking us to convince people of something we don't know anything about it?
Re: Recent Article by David French
Date: 2021-09-10 12:00 pm (UTC)