Off Topic Coronavirus and NOTHING to do with football thread

I agree that we don't know enough about it, so being a bit of a belt and braces person until we know more, then cover all possibilities. Having officials or PMs making light of the situation makes them unfit to hand out advice in my opinion.

 

I walked past a group of young teenager a couple of days ago, calling out to people rudely etc....

I thought about calling the police, and thought what a waste of resource so didnt, then thought about going to the store they were witting on the steps of to alert security staff..... but felt uncomfortable with snitching, meanwhile they could be spreadin the virus between their families etc etc.

 

Even the Guardian's article quoted a view that the criticism was a 'bit silly' and it was good thing to invest in bombed out share prices. This created higher share prices which made it easier to attract fresh capital and survive.

 

The emotive language has been removed.

 

First post of the day and it is nasty ....again..... always is eh...... you should go somewhere and spend some time doing some good works for people who have less than you ...you might learn something

 

yep , total bum wad , only the accumulation of capital is sacrosanct........

 

THE TRUE COST OF THIS VIRUS.........

 

Sorry Yorkie, but that is not going to be allowed. It just keeps the fire fuelled.

 

Can we move away from Moggy. I am trying to watch some interesting program about vineyards, which I prefer to editing posts.

 

Thank you........

 

Well I was stating the truth and using no offensive words........


Worth noting that for those who read this later, posts have been removed and edited......

 

You say that, but the police took a different view with the hundred people who attended my barbecue at the weekend.

 

Hancock told the Commons that the UK was one of a few countries to have developed a test for the latest coronavirus, so any suspected case could be diagnosed quickly.

This was the 23rd January, and we can see how he misled the Commons. Other countries have been far better prepared to test quickly so the UK wasn't one of the few with the ability to test. At that point worldwide 26 people had died, so he might well have thought it was not going to be this bad. He told MPs that tests would be carried out at Heathrow for anyone coming from Wuhan even though all flights from there had been cancelled. "The chief medical officer has revised the risk to the UK population from very low to low and concluded that while there is an increased likelihood that cases may arise in this country, we are well-prepared and well-equipped to deal with them" said Hancock.

So just a couple of months later and we can see how desperately unprepared the government actually was, and I would suggest it has been running to catch up ever since.

 

Yes and all targets re different tests, ventilators etc are now ambitions...

 

This raises a difficult point BB. Most governments are allowing so called essential services to continue - by that they mean supermarkets, grocery shops, chemists, petrol stations etc. but where do you draw the line as to what is 'essential' ? Why should people be allowed into a supermarket but not into a religious service ? Allowing that churches can regulate this and ensure spatial distancing just as in a supermarket. A person's religion can be a big help for them at times like this - people sat in church pews with 2 seats free between them cannot be a greater risk than in the average supermarket.

 

But "All of these people go to this church" doesn't really suggest that distancing is happening/possible within the church. I simply don't see that spiritual sustenance is more important than the sustenance gained from food, which actually is an essential to survival. There's nothing to stop religious worship being done at home - and I do find it crass to simply justify risking the lives of others by claiming "I'm covered in Jesus's blood" as though that is a universal panacea which will protect her from all ills. If she truly believes that, why on earth is she wearing a seat belt in the car?

Our supermarket here, in common with others in the surrounding area, allows only six customers in a time - and once inside, each customer is directed around the aisles in a one-way sytem, no doubling back. Far safer than sitting in a crowded church in my opinion.

 

I'll see your interview and raise you this quackery...

 

We don't know that the church was crowded BB. We're not looking at a new situation here - the modern World has suddenly become reacquanted with one of the oldest traveling companions of human history. Christianity has been living with epidemics for 2,000 years. Whatever happens the coronavirus will leave over 95% of its victims still breathing - yet it leaves virtually every member of society afraid, anxious, isolated, alone, and wondering if anyone would notice if they're gone. The coronavirus could easily mutate into an epidemic of fear. Church attendance serves as a societal roll call, especially for older people. If old Stan always sits in the same pew, week in week out, but suddenly isn't there then people will be alerted to the fact and enquire after him. The loss of the community support which a church can give could be just as devastating for some people as the virus itself. There is also a legal aspect to this - we are always being told that the church should not interfere with the state - yet the reverse is apparently possible. A reminder also that the interior of Cologne cathedral is beyond the jurisdiction of the state of Germany, and can only be legislated for by the church authorities. The state can recommend in this case but not more than that - I don't know about the legal position in other countries, or if the state can actually forbid religious services.

 

There are certainly ways for people who want to join with others in church services to do so. There is an Anglican diocese in France for the ex-pats, and they are streaming services from the home of one of the clergy on a Sunday for the English speakers. There are also services on French TV every Sunday morning without a congregation. As someone who has played at hundreds of services for congregations at some form of worship, marriages and funerals, I know just how much it means to many people, who often would not regard themselves as having any great religious belief. The people who have lost their big day at a wedding I feel for, but not as much as those who will not have the chance of a proper send off for their loved ones. As an organist at a funeral you will have requests before the event. Please do not play some of the more solemn music, or what upbeat hymns can we choose. It gives you great satisfaction when a grieving widow comes up and thanks you for getting it just right.
Some will find a poetry in the old King James bible and the traditional book of common prayer, while many will ask what on earth is that talking about. People who have thought about what they do believe have come up with many different ideas, which is why there are so many denominations. Others of course have found it all mumbo jumbo. It is often at a funeral that people will ask what is it all about? Very often they will question what they do believe.
I cannot believe that at a time like this church services are alright. In the early Christian churches they were very much people gathering in homes in small groups. Thanks to the internet that tradition can continue.

 

Just read up on the closing of Quaker meeting houses - they are allowed to open when hosting essential voluntary or public services, such as food banks or homeless services. The reality is that most of them throw themselves into the front line and do this type of work anyway, and consider it as a religious service.