Mike wrote:
Foolishness abounds.

I will also agree with you in saying that maintaining that precious thing called "freedom of speech" is important. But if those who believe strenuously in "freedom of speech" begin to lay down conditions concerning everyone who speaks, then they have just turned the whole thing on its head and become nothing more than dictators, or have begun to hold a similar political ideology as communists or controllers, where "the few" control "the many". Thusly, irrespective of any foolishness which is being spoken (or posted on this forum), I hold to the right of each one to post as he or she wishes, subject to obeying the sensible etiquette laid down by the website owner.

Regrettably over the years I have seen a great number of folks come and shortly go again, simply for the lambasting they have received at the hands of others, who would never see themselves as either foolish or racist, but by the evidence over many years have proved to the world that they actually are both of these things.

And so despite the gains made by the firebreak, the figures are now showing a steady increase again in cases and deaths.

Eventually, one of two scenarios will have to be enacted.

1. Let the virus run, and pretend it isn't there, in which case huge numbers of the population will die.

2. Lockdown for twelve months until the virus is producing no cases or deaths, but at the expense of the economy collapsing, resulting in such an increase in crime, that life will not be worth living for most people.

Kieron wrote:
1. To hide from a virus with a 99% survival rate is foolish and unbiblical) Lev. 13 and 14.

2. It does matter the direction governments go in! This affects the whole society including Christians. We are to pray for “the powers that be” because they are sinners, for salvation and just leadership.

3. No it cannot. They rebelled against God through Moses. If the government etc. is wrong we ought not to obey. Daniel understood this. Da. 6:9-10.)

1. It wouldn't be foolish to the 1% who would have otherwise died.

2. If a Democrat gov goes in Direction A, democrats will cheer and republicans will argue. This was my point. Secondly, I agree that Christians are to pray for the "powers that be". So if God chooses not to answer those prayers, we should obey the gov because God in his sovereignty allowed them the freedom to make contrary laws.

James Thomas wrote:
John,
I had only one intention which was to share information with you and others regarding the non effectiveness of lockdowns.
I hope you continue to do whatever you think necessary to be safe and abide by all rules set forth where you live as I do the same here and wish you well.

Kieron wrote:
John Lee from Wales: Don’t judge them harshly friend. The government has no constitutional authority, they could advise but not dictate. If people want to gather let them. Government officials don’t practice what they preach.

It matters little which direction the gov goes in, there will always be people who argue with them. If they do what you say and people die, you will grumble at them for not enforcing. If they enforce, you will grumble at them for enforcing.

Do you see what I mean?

Adriel wrote:
Good Morning, John.
California draws many plaudits from the wrong side being a very Lefty part of the world.
All part of the great battle.

[And then, McCoy took it further. He actually danced to striptease music, and not only did he take his tie off, he threw it into the audience – in which some members were holding up dollar bills for their multi-talented pastor.]

You don't get this kind of rebellion in the armed forces. Men and women there are disciplined. There has to be order. There has to be authority. There has to be such a thing as rank.

One of the problems with today's society is that everyone wants to be a general. They all want to call the shots. But society will never work when the people are like that. There has to be law, and there has to be order.

Or do they give you a slot online in the penitentiary?

So I ask again, James. What are you doing differently that you believe I ought to be doing? And what am I doing that you believe I ought not to be doing?

For example, you are convinced that "lockdowns" don't work, yes? Okay, so how does that belief affect your day to day life?

If you say it makes no difference, then why bother? Either you are a hypocrite or you just want an argument. Either way, you are not edifying anyone, including yourself.

Or is it that you are sticking your head in the sand, mumbling, "lockdowns don't work" and hoping that someone will come along and pull you out of the sand and tell you what to do about it?

And what can you do about it?

James Thomas wrote:
Sure John,
You have a choice in what you do with the information that I shared with you from the New England journal of Medicine which published an experiment that lockdowns don't work versus the current belief you have in thinking they do which is sourced from wherever you get your info from.

James Thomas wrote:
John said "Well if it doesn't make any difference in my life, where is the worth of saying it to me?"
I guess none. I'm just sharing. What you do with it is your choice.

James Thomas wrote:
I shared a piece of reliable impartial evidence that demonstrates that lock downs don't work that differs from that which your hearing in the UK on the effectiveness of lock downs. I hope that is clear to you. That's all I was attempting to say.

Romans 14:19 KJV
(19)  Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.

1 Thessalonians 5:11 KJV
(11)  Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

James Thomas wrote:
Why would we see very clear evidence that contradicts that line of reasoning from reputable sources then?

In the meantime, what is it that you are doing that you think I ought to be doing? And what am I doing that you think I ought not to be doing?

HerbalMama wrote:
Ah, yes, John, it works mighty fine. That's why we're in a continuous state of lockdown.

Herbal, I can only tell you what is happening in the UK. The lockdown at the first phase worked extremely well, and the gov tried to ease it back because of the detrimental effects. The number of cases and deaths were decreasing rapidly, and it was thought the back of the pandemic was broken. But it wasn't, and the virus took its opportunity to re-establish itself, and the second wave was on course to being far worse than the first, hitting young people and young families and universities. Hence yet another lockdown, during which the cases will again decrease and deaths will decrease also.

But surely you don't think the end of C19 means 'back to normal' do you? There are far worse things coming on the world than C19. This is a mere minor tribulation, and I speculate that the next one will be far stronger and more difficult to eradicate. And if you think that one will be sorted and so we can get 'back to normal', I speculate that the one after that will be even stronger and harder to deal with.

Frank wrote:
Amen and amen brother!

James Thomas wrote:
That's what they report, but is it true?

HerbalMama wrote:
Well, John, it appears lockdowns aren't working so logically this only means one thing...we need more lockdowns and tighter restrictions. Only 2 weeks is now only 8 months plus 3 more weeks because this virus is something we've never seen before. It defies all the characteristics of viruses (it has no season/replicates like a rabbit) and has a 98% chance of survival. We're in danger!!!!!! I have an idea.....let's close down churches but leave Walmart open. Let's close down Ma and Pa shops but leave Target open. Lets shut every thing down between 8pm and 5am because the virus needs to sleep. We're courteous like that.

In the UK, lockdowns work just fine to reduce the number of cases of Covid19, which in turn leads to less deaths.