Texas Gov Abbott Toughens Bans on Mask and Vaccine Mandates

Wow. The amount of misinformation reflected in this post is staggering. Whatever your sources are.. Stop using them they're lying to you or they're stupid/lied to.

Just to set one thing straight. Vaccine is recommended for those with prior infection.

 

Still not answering is a single posit but OK

Regions freedom (definition) the right to choose what religion to follow and to worship without interference.
The spanish comparison? Erroneous and you know it. That involved the imposition of one specific religion not the right to practice or learn about any religion.

 

You haven't bothered to read your own law yet have you?
https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-library/policies/pd-2002-0074
Any religious education has to be approved by your government. And since you've made it abundantly clear that anything you don't agree would not be approved, it's exactly the same. The parents can either have the nice state approved religious education or they can have a nice secular religious education.

So, I guess it's not an imposition of a single religion, it's a choice between state approved religions. Still not religious freedom.

 

And I was wondering how you were in a position to determine stupid concerning this virus.

 

She is 'fearfu of vaccines.' Some are 'fearful' of nuclear power. Some are 'fearful'
of GM tech. There is this political class that tells people what to be fearful of. We
are no longer fearful of polio, or electrifying our roofs, or the breakdown of our
families, contraceptives/narcotics in our waterways or our declining education
standards.

In this case govts in general are taking notice of what science is saying. This
Covid is quickly mutating into some far more virulent and deadly than what it
was just a year ago. If people refuse masks and vaccines then God help us all.

 

You going to convince everyone from all 200 countries? I think it will be circulating for some time...

 

I'll get back to you .For some reason 75% of my last post didn't 'stick'. So I have to go over old ground before I answer.

 

According to the UK numbers the delta variant isn’t more deadly.

 

death toll covid worldwide - Google Search
As of today theres 4.26 million deaths.

 

I am current on all my necessary vaccinations. I do not take vaccines for the flu, shingles, meningitis, or Covid. Instead, I keep a strong immune system and stay healthy. I do not get the flu while those getting the flu vaccine still manage to get sick.

When I was younger, I was prone to illness. Strep, sinus infections, flu, and daily allergies. Doctors kept the drugs coming. The antibiotics became less effective as the years went on and things got worse and took longer to recover. The last time, they decided to go big and give me a Sulfa drug, and I almost died. It left me with liver damage on top of my conditions.

After extensive research, I changed my diet and built up my immune system naturally. Instead of going to the doctor for drugs, I treated myself and as the years went by, recovery became shorter and eventually went away.

I have not been sick for 30+ years. My allergies are completely gone and my liver is back to normal.

Im sure you can understand my hesitancy.

 

Of course I understand your hesitancy. I am in the same boat except I was rarely sick when I was younger. I had chicken pox as a kid but nothing much more than a cold or mild flu.

The Dean at my university told me they were withholding my degree because my vaccination records weren't on file. My parents didn't have copies and the doctor that administered had long since passed. I was forced to get all my childhood immunizations again. I became VERY sick. I mean I almost died (no joke). I had double pneumonia for almost 7 months, ended up with scar tissue on my right lung and developed asthma. I had never been that sick in my entire life. It was brutal.

About two weeks ago, I was heading to a doctor's appointment and started having chest pains. She had the nurse call 911 and the paramedics took me to the ER. I never had chest pains but I have high blood pressure so there was a concern. Turns out my blood pressure was too low (81/60) but my heart rate was too high (around 14. After it was all said and done, turns out it was related to my asthma as it calmed down after I asked for an emergency inhaler (and the doctor ordered Respiratory to give me a nebulizer treatment). For whatever reason, it has really worsened this year. Again, I blame what happened all those years ago because that's the ONLY respiratory problem I've ever had.

I'm sure you know from reading my posts that I try not to be judgmental. I understand that we all make the decisions we think are best even if others don't agree with our choices. This is why I try to be kind because we just don't know what other people are dealing with and being mean or hateful or dismissive or whatever-negative-way doesn't help anybody. I may not always be able to help but I make a strong effort to never hurt others.

I hope you continue on your road of good health and this whole COVID thing is over for all of us soon.

 

OK first thing is I'm uploading and responding to your previous posts because as stated for some reason many points didn't upload. Sorry for the delay BTW.

Before I do though I'll' address a point you made above i.e. 'Any religious education has to be approved by your government.' That's just wrong. Firstly private religious schools exist and are a huge part of the education sector. Secondly State schools don't provide religious education. They provide time during the week and class room space but the providers/teachers are volunteers trained by the local peak body of the religious denomination concerned. Teacher's proper don't teach RE unless they're also trained in RE by a particular denomination and do so on a volunteer basis. And children only attend if parents have requested it. The instructors get vetted for 'child safety' of course but anyone working with or near children these days get that.

Beyond that here's the rest of what I was going to say.

Regarding Section 18C. It has in fact come close to being rescinded/amended a couple of times. So its perfectly feasible for that to happen. The problem is democracy. To date there hasn’t been enough popular support to get it to that point. But what can you do? That’s how democracy and politics work. You think it’s a good idea to change it? Perhaps move here and vote for it. That’s what we have to do if we want legislative change.

Next your claim that ’Private individuals are more than able to persecute and financially penalize those of another religion’ and that ‘laws against assault and murder are applied equally regardless of religion.’ Just proves my point. Even in the US where you claim people have complete religious freedom – they don’t. Religious rights are overridden by civil and criminal laws. And it’s the same across the Western World including Australia. No matter what ‘rights’ a particular religion may grant its followers in terms of how they are to deal with non-n believers those ‘rights’ have no legal standing. A Catholic cannot sue a non-catholic in a catholic court under church law. And hasn’t been able to since the enlightenment.

So your actually claiming you have more religious freedom in the US by pointing to the civil court system. A system that operates to the same effect in both Australian and the US.

As for the claims you made comparing the Spanish conquest to the Australian system? Again, just wrong since in theory State school religious programs are open to all religious groups providing a) the parents of a school want their children to attend education in that religion b) there are enough students to make it practical and c) they meet policies/guidelines policies on child protection and curriculum. Some small groups/cults won’t make the cut in most cases simply because they lack the sheer numbers in any one school to make it practical or they home school/go to private schools. And importantly the State cannot refuse an application if points a), b) & c) above are met. Parents then choose from a set of ‘providers’ all of whom are the peak bodies for the religious groups concerned. To date I have not found a single instance where a request to be placed on the list was turned down (which is not to say it hasn’t happened just that if so its very rare). So there’s bureaucracy involved but the State system is a bureaucracy.

Oh , and that link you sent me ( https://education.nsw.gov.au/policy-library/policies/pd-2002-0074) that's a policy document not a legal one. And all it does is set out how the States RE program is supposed to be integrated into the School system. It doesn't set any bars on which religious faiths may be taught. And it has a policy document on this because as I noted above it is a bureaucracy.

And as for stating; ‘you haven't shown yourself to have a single individual right that I do not have everywhere’.

OK fine, you go teach religious education in your local State high school and I’ll go buy a firearm. Deal? Oh wait!

My point? ALL civil rights, regardless of where they are enshrined (geographically) or how they are enshrined are constrained to some degree by legal precedent or statute law. That is fact. The right to vote, free speech, bear arms, freedom or religion etc not one is totally unlimited in scope or universal in application. And I'm not 'proud' as you put it of the right children have to religious education in State schools over here. I merely raised it as an example of how constitutional rights and their interpretation can vary from nation to nation. Right to bear arms - interpreted very broadly in the US. That right in Australia? Much more restricted. Right to freedom of religion" Some restrictions in place in the US that are not in place here. Swings & roundabouts

Which brings me back to main point. Which was that it is the collective impact of ALL rights accorded a citizen and how those rights are interpreted by the Courts that determine how 'free' a nation is. By default then picking one right and saying 'this makes me more free' that you' is a pointless exercise. Firstly because that doesn't measure the cumulative impact of every right someone may or may not enjoy in any nation. Secondly because its putting one right up on a pedestal and making it 'more important' than any other. That's not how it works ALL rights have to be equally important or none are. And as soon as you start 'cherry picking' one as being more important than another? By default you've devalued that other right. And when citizens start doing that - the end is near because that other right will slowly disappear.

Finally, as to the use of measures (like ratios?) any measurement is arbitrary. Depending on what is being measured some are just more useful than others. The fact that ratios are commonly is because it produces very useful and unbiased results.

P.S. Enjoying the debate.