It's been said your first murder is always the hardest. So what is to
stop this level of microdictatorship every time there is a flu or
disease outbreak?
Does social distancing really prevent disease? Am not really that close
to that many other human beings other than immediate family yet in the
past still picked up colds and such mostly likely that did not originate
with them.
If we are to be subjected to public service announcements urging us not
to touch our faces, how about some targeting certain demographics on the
importance of wiping their rear ends properly and washing their hands
afterwards?
It has been hypothesized that those that do not submit to a future
coronavirus vaccine complete with bio-tracking capabilities could be
prohibited from travel. But if such a vaccination really does provide
immunity for those that take it, what does it matter regarding those
that do not?
It has been suggested that even if risk of the Coronavirus subsided to a
reasonable level, those over 55 should remain quarantined indefinitely.
Will that be a personal choice or imposed by the state under threat of
violence which is how any governmental edict or law is ultimately
enforced? Will those with elderly in a long term care or even
independent living facility be allowed to see them ever again? So would
one’s 55th birthday become a ritual like the trip to Carousel in
“Logan’s Run” or the episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” where a
scientist had to abandon his work that would have saved his planet just
because he had reached a certain age?
The remark was made on Fox News that once the initial Coronavirus lock
down ends, the elderly should continue their social distancing while the
rest of us move on. Wonder how long until this results in the elderly
being excluded from society and then eventually eliminated preemptively
against their will? The threat of this disease lurking in the background
even if no one is actively suffering from it is going to be used to
justify all sorts of cultural deprivations and infringements of
liberties. Sort of like how those Japanese Americans had to be placed in
those facilities for “their own good”. This would also be a good way to
get many of the more doctrinally solid churches shuttered as well.
Wonder how much property will end up being seized before it’s all over
with to finance these Coronavirus relief programs.
Wonder how long, in the name of compassion of course, until the elderly
are herded against their will into quarantine colonies where they will
never again be allowed to see their loved ones?
So if the New York lock down applies particularly to those with
underlying health issues, does that mean they are snooping through the
medical files of those detained?
Cuomo says “social distancing is needed EVERYWHERE.” Does that include
our bedrooms where it was once insisted what two consenting adults did
was their own business?
In regards to the enforcement of social distancing decrees, are we to
assume that law enforcement is so superhuman that they can estimate the
difference between six feet and 5 feet 10 inches? If this is going to
be the racket through which governments finance assorted plague relief
efforts, the least that a citizenry subjected to such an intrusive
degree of scrutiny deserves is for these assessments to be determined
accurately rather than as a result of someone not having gotten their
doughnut before hypoglycemia sets in.
Apparently a number of prisons are releasing convicts over fears of the
Coronavirus spreading among the inmates and even to the staff. So why
would it be acceptable to detain those accused of violating social
distancing decrees (at this point can these even be considered actual
laws) and possibly even those over 55 now daring to show their unmasked
faces in public?
Ironic. The states now inclined to crack down the most vigorously
against the Coronavirus in terms of imposing near police state
conditions were the most lackadaisical in enforcing immigration laws
that could have played a part in curtailing this plague.
It was remarked, “Tim LaHaye made millions of dollars with his 'Left
Behind' series and his movies. Personally, I think that it is junk. Can
it be explained to me why Tim LaHaye's prophecy works are to be
condemned for a more literalistic interpretation of eschatological
portions of Scripture yet this same online theologian is noticeably
quiet or perhaps even accepting of Pat Robertson's prophetic
announcements? Both of these ministers are Premillennial with works
published teaching that the Tribulation period is to be understood as
foretelling events that will take place. So why is Tim LaHaye to be
condemned for having been a workman worthy of his hire? At least unlike
Robertson, LaHaye's fortune would have been made for the most part from
the actual selling of books and not begging for it through questionable
broadcast tactics with those proceeds going in part to pay for race
horses and his own private jet and Virginia Beach air landing strip.
Unlike Mrs. Robertson, I bet Beverly LaHaye never had to fear being
kicked to the curb in favor of a younger replacement had she been
stricken with dementia.
As of late, a popular theme among Gospel Coalition type churches is that
what we have does not belong to us but rather to God. Technically, that
is true. However,, it is hoped that such conceptual repetition will
make it easier to manipulate the pewfiller into more pliantly
surrendering the targeted financial resources or even acceptance of
compulsory income redistribution commonly referred to as increased
taxation. But if we are to view ourselves as mere stewards rather than
as owners, don’t we have an obligation to look to the needs of our own
households just as rigorously so that we won’t be a burden upon God’s
people.
In a prayer, a pastor lamented the divisive politics “polarizing our
nation at this time.” So just how many more fundamental liberties are we
obligated to surrender and compromise? Does the income that should be
redistributed also include the accumulated wealth of the church and the
pastor’s housing allowance? Or do the higher tax rates to be arrived at
in the name of compromise just apply to the dimwitted saps filling the
pews? Should the compromises also include the bill like the one being
proposed in Virginia where religious schools would not be allowed to
fire crossdressers? The pastor lamented that partisan politics is now
linked to the message of Christianity. But wasn’t that initially the
fault of progressives going out of their way to blatantly curtail the
expression of religious liberty and traditional values to the extent
that those holding to these could not help but come to the conclusion
that the only viable alternative in this country was some degree of
participation in the Republican Party?
Jim Bakker hawking 5 gallon survivalist buckets of pinto beans. No wonder some folks need so much toilet paper.
Given that Prince Charles contracted Coronavirus, wonder if his father
Prince Phillip remained as keen on the prospect of plagues wiping out
vast swaths of humanity.
By Frederick Meekins
