Starts playing games Oct 22-23
Starts playing games Oct 22-23
Reversals are what happens when you mess up initially. It’s looking like college football should have played the season as scheduled, and that may have happened had the B1G and PAC? not cancelled their seasons.
I think the lesson learned from all of this is that our nation values sustainability of higher learning, athletics and "personal freedoms" more than public safety and the lives of somewhere between 500k and 1M (or maybe more) lives before this is all over. Not to mention long term complications that we do not know yet.
I'm not passing any judgment one way or another as I will definitely benefit (and have) from returning sports, but it is definitely a bittersweet enjoyment when I think of all the lives and complications that are happening. My heart is with the families and loved ones of those that have suffered and lost.
There is no moral argument anymore about protecting and keeping us safe or right to life points of view. Everything is all about money and entertainment.
I don't think the B1G was wrong to begin with and I do not think their reversal is wrong. They made the decisions they had to with the information that we knew then and now, and that now is that dollars are more important than sacrifice and safety.
I disagree completely, Stu. MLB, the NBA and the NFL have shown that sports can be operated without furthering spread of the virus. High school sports aren’t being operated for the all mighty dollar.
What sports and entertainment do is to reintroduce some normalcy into life.
This is the least "stunning" thing to happen since Willie Nelson admitted to smoking pot while in the White House.
Give up all that money and cede the whole season to the other Power conferences? Oh please.
They thought they would be out in front on this, and everyone would cancel. When the SEC starts up a full weekend of highly viewed football this next weekend the athletics departments in the B?? were going to lose their minds.
AP rankings without a single one of their teams in it for a whole season? This was very easy to see coming.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
Please be careful not to touch on political issues. There's always a slippery slope.
Right now that slope has oil on it.
I love how "personal freedoms" are in quotes as if they aren't relevant.Originally Posted by StuBleedsBlue2
All of life is a balance between safety and simply living life. I can keep us all safer by banning non-essential travel forever. Ban bungee jumping, base diving, private swimming pools, I can save a lot of lives.
We choose to not do those things b/c a) people are endowed by a power greater than the state or even other citizens with inalienable rights, and we choose to tread on those rights as little as possible, and b) the only way to make everyone maximally safe is to restrict our lives to such a degree our lives are not worth preserving.
We could keep the aged alive longer by warehousing them in sterile environments, caged up with access only to irradiated food and workers in sterile suits like some sci fi dystopian nightmare, but at that point no one would want to keep living.
So it's always a balance, and, not surprisingly, that balance is different for everyone, and thus, in conjunction with the inherent rights given to us by someone more important than a politician, we let people choose their own level as much as possible.
Humans have survived far worse plagues, and done so while still contributing art and music and yes entertainment to the world.
Man cannot live by bread alone, and neither would he want to, so we find a balance. Lots of testing, distancing, spreading out fans to extremes, etc. all seems a very reasonable balance.
The absolutist notion that not doing every single thing possible to preserve every possible life means you don't care about preserving life is a complete falsehood, a dangerous moral strawman that, like every other faux morality that "if you don't agree with me you're immoral", only serves to hold back our species.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
I'm going to copy this thread over to Barber Shop (aptly abbreviated BS), and then we can moderate this one, including my last post which I will do.
Last edited by CitizenBBN; 09-16-2020 at 11:20 AM.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
I think there is a lot of merit to what you are saying honestly. I've witnessed it on the youth level and parents are going literally INSANE to see their kids play sports regardless of their views of the risk. I get it i really do, and especially in the middle of being cooped up for 6 months and thinking there is another 6 months to go. Mental health and education/development of kids and parents is at stake here and i believe may carry more weight than the impending loss of life due to COVID.
Opening amateur sports outside of a "bubble" is going to certain cause for rapid spread that we have likely not seen yet. Only 150 or so kids under 21 have passed from this, so the risk isnt theirs, it is with whom they carry it to. It is what it is and im resigned to that being ok. I tell my parents to be extra careful.
Go Cats!
Huge difference between college and pro sports. Also, we have not seen yet that the NFL can be operated without furthering spread.
MLB has proven with its limitation that the virus can spread. The NBA and NHL have been successful because they have operated in a bubble.
College football is THE best collective engagement sports there is. It is a campus event, It's a family/friends event. It is more like a holiday than it is a day-to-day event like a professional sports game.
I cannot accept that there will not be upticks in events and gatherings with the return of college football and we have yet to see ANY event that includes gatherings that have not yielded increase in spreading, cases and ultimately deaths. Not to mention that we have not even reached the flu/virus season yet.
Surely, you can be of opinion that engagement with college football with emulate that of the professional sports. I totally disagree, especially since there is a very large (albeit minority) point of view that the virus has run its course. I guess we will see.
You touch on something here that I have been trying to get across. I think there is a collective dishonesty of what we are willing to accept. I am not here to judge what is right or wrong, but simply searching for a consensus of what we are doing.
You bring up mental health issues, which has been a HUGE issue before COVID. You are right, there are definitely mental considerations to consider as we prioritize how we balance normalcy vs public health. However, I have a couple of issues personally. One, after we have all ignored mental health for so long, NOW it takes priority that it is affecting those that never cared about it? Two, we are now saying that addressing mental health issues is MORE important than saving the lives of 100's of thousands of people that do not, or did not, have to die.
We all have to live with the collective decisions that are made, and as I pointed out, I will benefit from the decisions as I love college sports. I am just not going to pretend to think we live in a country where public safety is our top priority and pro-life arguments. It is a sham. We have proven that self-interests are more important.
For me personally, there won't be one game that I watch that I will not think about those that will be impacted by the decisions that we make.
I put that in quotes because it is the number 1 excuse for those that will not work masks, but they are somehow silent on all the other laws and mandates they follow established to ensure and promote public safety.
I do not need to list them, but there are plenty. It is no more an infringement on personal freedoms than any of these other laws, regulations, etc.
The "personal freedom" argument is a disguise something bigger, and that is a talking point echoed by Trump and followed by his minions. It's a tool for divisiveness and nothing else. Actually, I think there's a segment of non-maskers that will use whatever excuse they have to not wear one because doing so is the first time they had to smell the crap breath they have been subjecting people to all these years.
Until one of these "personal freedom" idiots can give a good answer as to how their freedoms are being restricted relative to any other of these other things that people willfully obey, then it stays in quotes. We are talking about a piece of cloth around your mouth. That's it.
You are so wrong and so off it is not even worth my time. Please go read the US Constitution and the papers behind it and learn about the men that created it. Their number 1 goal was on the freedom and power of indivudal freedom OVER the power of government. That was their sole intent. If you do not like that, there are a lot of european government forms that agree with you. go there.
BTW, what happened to my original $$$ Post?
Is there anything more pompous than defining what others believe and ascribing motives to it? More important perhaps, is there anything that is more divisive and less likely to lead to understanding?
You have on here called for understanding of your position many times, yet never extend that to those who disagree. Maybe those who tout freedoms, wait for it, actually care passionately about individual freedoms, and aren't just "Trump's minions" and "Dittoheads", an attack you have used more than once to characterize those who disagree.
As for your argument that we have lost other freedoms so why whine about these, I could say we've already lost 700K lives, why whine about another 300K. See how absurd that is?
First, I'm betting most who care about freedoms aren't real happy with most of those others you might list either. second, even if they are, it doesn't change the question, any more than someone being OK with property theft and not being OK with rape and saying well if you're OK with one you have to be OK with the other. They are independent questions.
Now, do I think it's a horrific infringement in light of a pandemic? No I do not, and in fact I would argue that as the spread of Covid is an externality that it is a rightful place for government to sometime act, just as with polluting a river downstream.
But that doesn't change the fact that others feel differently.
And of course, your whole point is a bit of a strawman b/c the argument over liberty in this isn't contained to just wearing masks. It's part of it, and I disagree, but it's also restricting access to one's family, etc.
The simple truth is that the American system was set up to pursue liberty, not safety. Thus when faced with situations like these we will probably not respond as well as a nation with more despotic rule as we are generally non-conformist in nature.
I can live with that b/c in the end liberty is more important in the long term than facing a pandemic once a century. Apparently you cannot, but that's b/c you don't really value individual liberty very highly. But the fact that others disagree with you does not make them "idiots" nor does it make them morally inferior.
At some point I'd be happy to discuss the philosophical underpinnings that support the moral superiority of the pursuit of liberty versus the modern "social justice" formation of the basic notion that subservience to the greater state is superior, but suffice to say the jury is out on that one and just b/c you call for the state to act in what you think are the best interests of the whole does not provide any inherent moral high ground.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
It would be nice if just one nation on Earth could be left to pursue individual liberty. Literally every other nation is founded basically by historic and ethnic happenstance and none of them have such a mission, so why not go to one of them and leave this one for those of us who think liberty is actually still deeply important?
No, they have to save us from ourselves apparently.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
Not sure, I deleted a few posts on the other board to clean that up, but none on here.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
Nice try........
Aging is an extraordinary process where you become the person you always should have been.--David Bowie.
Go hide under your couch but let the rest of us live our lives. Do what you think is best for you....I could care less, but don't force your paranoia on everybody else
Aging is an extraordinary process where you become the person you always should have been.--David Bowie.
If I am so wrong then why don't you point out all the other laws and regulations that we have in this country for public safety and why are people not throwing such a "personal freedom" fight over those too?
Seatbelt Laws
Smoking in public places
Helmet laws
Speeding laws (well, pretty much all traffic laws)
Public Intoxication
Drug laws
I can go on and on...
ALL of these limit personal freedoms, but wearing a stupid piece of cloth over your face is the one that causes so many to lose their minds?
Would you please care to explain to me why this ONE causes such an uproar?
I'm all for personal freedoms, but I am MORE for sacrifice to keep our nation safe, especially in instances where it is temporary.
All I ask for is for people to be consistent and don't selectively choose for what you are fighting in the name of personal freedom. The mask argument is complete BS. I have still not heard one good argument on how it is.
Your image of me "hiding under my couch" must be quite humorous to you. I'm having a good ole time in 2020. It's been a great year. There's been some down moments, but I haven't let that stop me.
I like to travel, to hang out with friends, go to large events, go out on the town, socially active. I didn't let a pandemic slow me down, but I adjusted. 3 things our experts tell us to do to stay safe and can get us past this: 1) Wear masks 2) Wash you hands 3) avoid large gatherings. I diligently practice all 3 and besides missing concerts and sporting events, my life has been pretty awesome in 2020.
The "why don't you" game is so childish. It's two times in this thread that it's been directed to me. So I'll act like a child for a minute too since that is where the tone has been lowered to (I have no problem going low when others do).
Do what is best for you, why don't you just live life like there isn't a contagious deadly virus. If you get sick, or worse, I could care less, but don't force your reckless idiocy on everybody else. It may actually hurt someone.
People do throw fits over those, all the time. Kentucky had a knock down drag out fight in the assembly over seatbelt laws.
Unfortunately people on your side of the aisle, who don't care about individual rights over the "greater social good", managed to win the battle, so now we have a ton of those very unconstitutional laws on the books.
This one is an uproar for a simple reason: it impacts EVERYONE. Most people won't get upset about a helmet law if they don't ride a bike, or speeding if they don't speed, or drug laws if they don't do drugs.
Really? You need help understanding that's how it works?
Go try to ban alcohol and see how that goes. Why? B/c too many people drink, but the FDA managed to ban clove cigarettes without a peep b/c so few used them.
Now, should we all be mad that cloves are banned and pot is banned but tobacco is OK? Maybe, but that's asking a lot of the average person. Most don't work that way, they only care about what impacts them.
Oh, and if you look at those individual laws you cite you'll find a strong correlation between their level of existence and impact and the color of the voters. Lexington banned smoking, but outside of blue counties there are few restrictions, just like mask wearing.
Speeding laws? Go to Montana. They only exist in their current form b/c of them being tied to transportation money, and are lower in blue counties/states than red ones. Same as masks.
Drug laws is one where it flips, b/c drug use is seen as immoral and the externalities (crime, death) are clear and accepted. So if you don't do drugs you don't want others to do them b/c they are an externality you don't like, but with masks they are asking YOU to wear one too, and that's different b/c the ban on heroin doesn't really impact you as you aren't a user.
So, that's your answer. It is b/c that law impacts everyone, and the laws you cite effectively do not.
Go try to ban guns and see how it goes, or even tobacco or booze. You'll think the mask fight was a group hug. that's how this works.
And the key point is this: it's not for YOU to decide what OTHERS think are their important and unimportant rights, or infringement on the same.
You effectively miss the entire point b/c you don't value individual liberty: that whether they think a mask is an infringement or not is their God given right to decide, not yours to decide they are wrong and ignore their position.
Each person owns their own liberty, it's theirs to decide with as they choose so long as those choices don't infringe on the rights of others.
Which btw is the argument for masks being a valid infringement on one's rights, but it is still an infringement, just maybe one that is justified by the Social Contract.
Last edited by CitizenBBN; 09-16-2020 at 06:12 PM.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
And fwiw if I were Trump or another leader, that's how I would approach it.
Yes, this is an infringement on our liberty, but our liberty is limited to actions that do not impact the liberty of others, and where those two bubbles overlap we must as a whole decide how to resolve the conflict.
In this case the infringement on others by risking spreading the disease is great enough to justify some infringement to require masks. It's a gray area, a judgement call, and it is absolutely a limitation on our liberty, but one we need to endure in temporary form for the proper balance with protecting the rights of others to their life and health.
Just be honest about it, and what must be done.
BUT, it must also be tempered without blanket foolishness, and honestly I am not sure it can be a legal requirement more than a bully pulpit request. Ask they be worn in public spaces and gathering spots, but I see no basis for the blanket demands made in some states, nor the total shutdowns.
It's sometimes necessary for the social contract that we sacrifice TEMPORARILY in clear ways, like mobilizing for WWII, but we should always be clear, and limit our infringement to what is necessary and always approach our infringement with a heavy weight of responsibility as to the seriousness of what we are doing so that it is tempered as much as possible.
Where it gets very unclear, and overkill, is when we talk about things like football. Banning it outright versus more tempered responses is where this overreach occurs, or total lockdowns on hair dressers versus just spacing and testing.
yes, it's less safe than just welding us in our homes, but this is a land of liberty, not Chinese statism. Freedom isn't free, whether it is a war or a virus, and many Americans (thankfully) are too proud to cower completely from the rain.
Last edited by CitizenBBN; 09-16-2020 at 06:19 PM.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
There is so much here that is just plain stupid, I don't know where to begin. So I'll just focus on a couple.
"Each person owns their own liberty, it's theirs to decide with as they choose so long as those choices don't infringe on the rights of others." This is where your argument falls completely flat. Not wearing a mask and potentially being an asymptomatic spreader is ABSOLUTELY infringing on the rights of others. It's just like smoking in public places. It's just like drinking and driving laws.
And the key point is this: it's not for YOU to decide what OTHERS think are their important and unimportant rights, or infringement on the same. I never claimed that it is for ME to decide what OTHERS think are important and not. I said be consistent. No one can give me a reasonable answer as to why wearing a mask is SO much more an infringement than any other laws and regulations that involve public safety. I have my theory, which I have detailed. You seem to like to tell me how things work. Why are masks SUCH a major infringement relative to all the other (permanent) infringements?
There is one thing that you said that I agree with and its really my entire point:
Which btw is the argument for masks being a valid infringement on one's rights, but it is still an infringement, just maybe one that is justified by the Social Contract.
We accept minor infringements on our freedoms all the time that are justifiable by the social contract. That's what masks are. It is a short term sacrifice for long term gain. You have provided some very specific isolated incidents, but have failed to provide any explanation of why there is this national venom towards masks.
I'll wrap it up with this, you think you have me pegged, but you really don't. It's quite comical. You see, I am not this person that wants to ban this and that. Whatever a person (or consenting people) want to do that does not affect others, I'm all for it. Alcohol, drugs, prostitution, guns, smoking, no seatbelts, no helmets, you name it...However, I don't believe in anything unfettered, especially freedoms and capitalism. For everything great that our nation stands for, there is abuse that must be checked and limited as anything that goes unchecked are going to have safety implications. It IS our government's #1 priority to keep us safe.
So when our national health experts say that wearing a mask for a period of time is going to save lives and protect one another, it is absolutely something I can sacrifice. I find it sad that others do not feel the same sense of patriotism to do what is absolutely best for our country.
I wouldn't have necessarily put it this way, but I don't disagree with much of what you have said here. Especially the part about, "that how I would approach it".
Stu, be careful with the direct insults.
second, read my whole post. I told you not wearing a mask is a potential externality and thus subject to regulation by the whole of the Social Contract. In more than one post. I was just telling you that such regulation is a restriction of liberty, albeit a justified one in philosophical terms.
My point was never about whether requiring masks is OK or not.
My point was you never try to understand anyone who disagrees with you, choosing to simply dismiss their position with faux morality (people don't care about lives, just entertainment) or the classic ad hominem (anyone who says X is just a Trump minion).
My opposition isn't with masks, it's with not respecting those who feel their liberty is being infringed. Primary among all in this country should be respect for liberty, and if so many feel it is not being respected then we need to listen and understand and act with all possible moderation to achieve the policy aim.
Too much policy is being made by Governors in this country without enough weight given to the fact that these actions ARE by their nature intrusive and infringing.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
But yes, in large part we agree on masks, and on seat belts, etc. If i can just get you to see the beauty of the Invisible Hand I might get you over to the light of Libertarianism yet.
People keep asking if I'm back and I haven't really had an answer. But now, yeah, I'm thinkin' I'm back.
3 counterpoints here:
1) I punch back. If I am insulted, I certainly deserve that right. I would appreciate it if the warning was given to both sides, especially the instigator.
2) I totally will listen to those that have opposing views. I am no more dismissive, categorical, labeling as many others. I just happen to have a different POV than many others here. I participate in the discussion because I WANT to hear from people with opposing views. I do not have the confidence that others feel the same way.
3) Respect goes two ways. The incessant whining, the lack of compassion, the lack of respect when people storm businesses and accost store employees, the "Karen's" and so on. Those folks have no respect for anything but themselves. If someone doesn't want to wear a mask, then don't wear one in the privacy of your homes, friend's houses and businesses that do not require to do so. Protest all you want. If you want respect, offer it to others.
Let's take a moment to pause a celebrate a moment of agreement and get back at it.But yes, in large part we agree on masks, and on seat belts, etc. If i can just get you to see the beauty of the Invisible Hand I might get you over to the light of Libertarianism yet.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks