The crazies are at it again. People who want to reopen the economy are now labelled "pro-death".
Here's an example: Dr. Oz spoke on the news about reopening the schools. He pointed out that huge numbers of children who depend on schools to get good meals are now at home and "food insecure". Food insecure is apparently the politically correct way to say hungry and malnourished, maybe even starving. He also pointed out that particularly in homes where the parents are out of work now and perhaps drinking more than they should, there would likely be a major increase in child abuse. So far, so good. But then Dr. Oz said that reopening schools might increase the deaths from corona virus by 2-3%. That was it; Dr. Oz is now "pro-death". Most of the outcry came at first from idiots who didn't understand what the doctor said. The idiots thought he was saying that 2-3% of the children who went back to school would die. That's wrong. He's saying that across America, at the end of the pandemic, there might be a figure of total deaths higher by 2-3% than if the schools were not reopened.
Think about that. There are literally millions of kids who rely on school for good food. There are likely tens of thousands of kids who will suffer abuse while cooped up in their homes during the pandemic. And, of course, there are tens of millions of kids who are having a big chunk of time taken from their educations. That's on the one hand. On the other hand, there might be 1200-1800 more people dead at the end of the pandemic if the schools reopen. Nearly all of those "extra" deaths will be of people with serious medical problems already. (Over 90% of those who die from the virus have at least two other serious and life threatening problems like heart disease or severe asthma.)
I think it is safe to say that no one is in favor of more deaths (other than Planned Parenthood.) That's not the issue here. The real question is which course of action will be best for our society as a whole. When our military goes to war, we can't operate on the basis that no one can die. There will be casualties. When we consider something mundane like driving, we don't say that people will die in accidents, so we all cannot drive. No, we have to make socially reasonable choices. How many people die from alcohol, cigarettes, and the like; still, we don't ban these activities. During the height of the AIDs epidemic, we didn't ban sexual activity even though that might have saved many lived.
Stating the idea that anyone is pro-death is just a way to try to use fear to win an argument. It's a foolish and inappropriate way to proceed.
Here's an example: Dr. Oz spoke on the news about reopening the schools. He pointed out that huge numbers of children who depend on schools to get good meals are now at home and "food insecure". Food insecure is apparently the politically correct way to say hungry and malnourished, maybe even starving. He also pointed out that particularly in homes where the parents are out of work now and perhaps drinking more than they should, there would likely be a major increase in child abuse. So far, so good. But then Dr. Oz said that reopening schools might increase the deaths from corona virus by 2-3%. That was it; Dr. Oz is now "pro-death". Most of the outcry came at first from idiots who didn't understand what the doctor said. The idiots thought he was saying that 2-3% of the children who went back to school would die. That's wrong. He's saying that across America, at the end of the pandemic, there might be a figure of total deaths higher by 2-3% than if the schools were not reopened.
Think about that. There are literally millions of kids who rely on school for good food. There are likely tens of thousands of kids who will suffer abuse while cooped up in their homes during the pandemic. And, of course, there are tens of millions of kids who are having a big chunk of time taken from their educations. That's on the one hand. On the other hand, there might be 1200-1800 more people dead at the end of the pandemic if the schools reopen. Nearly all of those "extra" deaths will be of people with serious medical problems already. (Over 90% of those who die from the virus have at least two other serious and life threatening problems like heart disease or severe asthma.)
I think it is safe to say that no one is in favor of more deaths (other than Planned Parenthood.) That's not the issue here. The real question is which course of action will be best for our society as a whole. When our military goes to war, we can't operate on the basis that no one can die. There will be casualties. When we consider something mundane like driving, we don't say that people will die in accidents, so we all cannot drive. No, we have to make socially reasonable choices. How many people die from alcohol, cigarettes, and the like; still, we don't ban these activities. During the height of the AIDs epidemic, we didn't ban sexual activity even though that might have saved many lived.
Stating the idea that anyone is pro-death is just a way to try to use fear to win an argument. It's a foolish and inappropriate way to proceed.
No comments:
Post a Comment