I've spoken on prioritization in multiple posts in this thread. You have yet to give a good reason to make it about jab status rather than the individual level of sickness.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Elective Disease
- Thread starter Revoltingest
- Start date
I didn't dislike it.
Just thought you weren't contributing anything useful.
Wu Wei
ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Yup, if you are looking at it logically, and not out of fear, or through a pair of politically tinted glasses. And it still comes back to, how does it help to set up this division between those who got the vaccine and those who didn't. Especially when that division includes name calling and blame
Let's change the framing a bit with a hypothetical exercise. There are three individuals:
- An individual with a gun shot wound to the chest.
- An unvaccinated individual suffering from COVID complications.
- A drunk man found in the bushes outside of a local Olive Garden
I gave good reasons from my perspective.
I just disagree with your priorities.
I don't favor rewarding dangerous irresponsibility
with preference in times of shortage.
Wu Wei
ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
Especially since it is not agreeing your position due to your vitriol for the "anti-vaxers" and not throwing gas on the fire of vaccine division and derision eh
People are naturally frustrated. It is like a group project in high school with those who don't contribute. Except instead of getting a D- in Civics Class, you die.
We Never Know
No Slack
Ok you be Frank and I will be Joe 
I agree with you. Lets also push aside the DWI driver who wrecked, the person who is diabetic because of their poor diet, the person suffering cardiac stress because of their hefty weight, the addicted who overdosed, etc.
I agree with you. Lets also push aside the DWI driver who wrecked, the person who is diabetic because of their poor diet, the person suffering cardiac stress because of their hefty weight, the addicted who overdosed, etc.
The person with the greatest need, obviously. I thought I made that clear. Shoot, I want to the ER earlier this year for being far too drunk and I didn't get a room. They just stuck me on a gurney infront of the nurse's station until I came to and then sent me home. So be it.
You didn't choose.
And that's not based on logic.
I didn't see you disagree...or even take a position.
One might say that you came here with no views
on the matter....just "vitriol".
But I'd never say such a thing.
All of those individuals get pushed aside if there aren't any beds, thats the problem.Ok you be Frank and I will be Joe
I agree with you. Lets also push aside the DWI driver who wrecked, the person who is diabetic because of their poor diet, the person suffering cardiac stress because of their hefty weight, the addicted who overdosed, etc.
Neither is your position, Mr Spock.
I would have to know more about the individual case, obviously. Probably the person with the gunshot wound, duh. Oh, but maybe he's unjabbed, a gangbanger, a drunk, drug addict, fat, etc. so leave him to die. Happy now?
Show how. You haven't.
I am, thank you! I agree and that is part of the discussion we are having. But when you insist on making it a personal attack against yourself, it makes these discussions less enjoyable.
What exactly do you agree with? There was some sarcasm there, in case you didn't know.
We Never Know
No Slack
A hospital and its staff are their to treat the ill, its not based on who or why, its based on first come.
I am getting the impression you aren't here to have a discussion at all, are you?