Our Letter Carrier Takes the Curve

Show Outline with Links

Panic and Perspective

I really appreciate your post – Three Reasons Why the White House Must Not Panic. My husband and I own a small business in Pennsylvania. As news of the coronavirus began appearing we were not apt to panic about it; however, as the news of mandatory closures of businesses (before our state had more than a hundred cases) began pouring in we very quickly began to panic about our ability to survive. News stories declaring this could last for 18 months and friends already essentially declaring bankruptcy before our quarantine was 48 hours old just increased our panic. Recognizing that things were quickly getting out of control, we turned to the Bible, repentance, and prayer. God’s peace just as quickly took over our hearts and our family motto became, “We will not panic.”

However, as I visited the grocery store for our weekly essentials, it was clear that our society is currently dealing in panic. We all know about no toilet paper, but no pasta, pasta sauce, canned goods, eggs, butter, yogurt, cheese, etc. From the look of our country grocery store you would think that a bomb had just dropped nearby and a war was on. The reason people are panicking is because nearby counties have shut-down completely and people are concerned that soon they won’t be able to go to the grocery store. I bought what I could, smiled to everyone I could, and thanked the workers. As I left I reminded myself — “We will not panic!” And sang some hymns on the way home.

I completely agree with you that the White House must not panic! It has also struck me that we as Christians must not either. As my husband and I asked ourselves, what is the role of the church in this, it is becoming ever more clear — show them His peace. We are struggling to know how to do that when the society seems to want to burn down around us. Our household is one thing; however, Christian family and friends are just as panicked as everyone else and our churches are currently closed.

How do we share the good news of Christ and His peace with others when we are relegated to our proverbial four walls. Do we defy orders, open our churches, post the good news of Jesus Christ on our Facebook account, or just sit back and watch things unfold? I know what our society needs but do not exactly know how to do it in a way that influences the culture. Knowing that the Lord is good, always, and that He has an uncanny ability of giving ideas to many of His followers at the same time, I was very pleased to see your post; but would love to hear some suggestions about how “no panic” looks outside of the White House.

K

K, thanks. I hope there will be more practical teaching coming.

RE: Three Reasons Why the White House Must Refuse to Panic

Gotta love the Internet Archive for your missing article

Mike

Mike, thanks. And everyone else, remember, the issue is not whether this article was great or terrible, but rather whether an orthodoxy of publicly-allowed responses is being developed.

The White House should be as panicked as they have the wits to be. The entire country is in the process of finding out that when we’re in the middle of an actual crisis, maybe electing an incompetent, self-absorbed narcissist who refuses to listen to advice wasn’t such a great idea after all. Even if the alternative was that poor children have health care.

Mike

Mike, you need to amend that to some poor children have health care. Because other poor children are chopped up into constitutional pieces and sold for parts.

Re. Three Reasons Why the White House Must Refuse to Panic

“Computer Modeling is Not Science.” Amen and amen. I do that sort of thing for a living and here’s the nut of it: It’s easy to predict the future, it’s just hard to be right. Shakespeare said something similar.

GLENDOWER

I can call spirits from the vasty deep.

HOTSPUR

Why, so can I, or so can any man;

But will they come when you do call for them?

Rob

Rob, thanks very much.

This article was very similar to some of my recent thoughts. I am much more concerned about what the governments are doing to us than what the virus might do. The DoJ was recently asking for authority to suspend constitutional liberties. And I am concerned at how quickly we have ceded our constitutional right to freedom of assembly. We have allowed the government to control the conversation on this. They have said that gatherings of more than 10 people are “banned.” But it seems to me that this is unconstitutional (correct me if I am wrong). And we should not be OK with the language of gatherings being “banned.” In this coronavirus situation it may be the right thing to do not to gather out of love for our neighbor and concern for our communities. But we should not say that we are obeying the government mandate not to gather. We should say that we are choosing to comply with the government’s recommendation. We should be clear that we make the choice to voluntarily abridge our rights for the good of others not because the government is ordering us to. It seems to me that by allowing the conversation to go the way it has we have implicitly handed over our right to assemble. And that is not a happy trajectory.

Craig

Craig, I would differ with one thing. If this were the Black Death, I think the government would have the legitimate authority to shut down public gatherings for the time being. Quarantining is a biblical concept. But it is not appropriate to do this on the basis of what somebody thinks might happen.

RE: “Like taking a header into the river to get out of some drizzle”

I’m happy to see you linked Ioannidis, as he is one of the few people brave enough to swim against the panicky current here. Others include William Briggs (wmbriggs.com) and the psuedonymous “Z Man,” who has an excellent post outlining the moral hazards attending to elected office in time of crisis: “The Garden Gnome Gambit.” I think he hits on the incentive structure that caused so many politicians to pick up and run with this thing, including President Trump himself. It’s hard to see where the unwinding might start, though this bit about chloroquinine smells a lot like your third “tada!” option.

For myself I find the panic, and the mockery and unpersoning (by people who jolly well should know better) of those questioning the severity of the pandemic and the warrant for the response, far more frightening than the virus itself. As of today there have yet to be 300 persons sent off to this judgement with this virus as God’s instrument, if the official stats are correct. This is “extremely rare form of cancer” or “slipped in the tub and broke your neck” territory.

E

E, thanks.

In your post titled “Like Taking a Header Into the River to Get Out of Some Drizzle,” you linked an article written by a Stanford professor titled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data,” which, ironically, used some of the most unreliable data to date to draw completely erroneous conclusions about the COVID-19 pandemic! Please listen to the interview with Harvard epidemiologist Dr. Eric Ding, rated in 2018 among the top 1% of scientists in the world, who provides a much more informed approach:

I do appreciate your encouragement to “Remember that God is always good, all the time” for those who look in “genuine faith to Jesus Christ.” That truly is the late breaking, bombshell, eternally good news! All other news will always be subordinate to that.

Blessings

Michelle

Michelle, thanks very much.

Thank you for the intellectual rigor behind the current events in Contagion, Cooties, and ‘Rona. Trying to comb the expanse of journalism that seems to continually fan the fear surrounding this pandemic is hard but is refreshing to see Christians trying to make sense of it all with sober-mindedness. The pandemic is making me muse the eschatological implications in our response to it. So, how do you as a postmillennialist make sense of CoVID-19 in the grand scheme of time and history? How would this perspective change our evangelism and service to our neighbors with a positive eschatology?

Thank you,

Bryce

Global pandemic! Earthquake in Salt Lake City! Tom Brady leaves the Patriots! How is it that we are not all dispensationalists now?

Seriously, God has frequently used methods of creative destruction to advance His purposes and kingdom. This is no exception.

Thanks for the wisdom that you shared in “Contagion, Cooties, and COVID-19”. Your warnings against panic are especially needed. On the question of jurisdiction, I want to point out that the restrictions you cited from Leviticus concerning lepers were reactionary. A person is exiled after an infection has been confirmed. Quarantining a person who has leprosy seems different than isolating everyone who might get leprosy.

Josh

Josh, this is exactly right.

Read your essay about the COVID19 thing. Wonder if you’ve done the math. Have you considered the economic impact of leaving this thing unchecked? What about the economic impact of those who almost die and no longer can work because they are now medically disabled. Having the nation pausing and reflecting for two weeks could actually be a good thing. Spending billions of dollars of paper money that has no true value is just more of the same thing politicians do every day although a bit, admittedly, heavy on the turbo charge. Being cavalier about 1 to 2 million people dying that could be altered by a two week pause seems callous. I imagine we could actually love our neighbor by not getting sick and not being a vector of disease. That means stay home for awhile and pause and reflect on how kind He is and perhaps have time to share the good news with our neighbor while we chat over the fence because we have nothing else to do rather than frenziedly scattering off to work as seems to happen pretty much every other day that’s not infected with this quite unique COVID19. Cheers!

Karl

Karl, our responsibility to love our neighbor works in two directions. At some point, the cure can get worse than the disease. California is losing billions of dollars a week in lost revenue — that is money that is not going to people in marginal situations. How many businesses are going to close? How many foreclosures? How many bankruptcies? How many suicides?

When we are deciding on whether to go this direction or that, we need to take responsibility for our actions for either direction.

Not Wobbly

Non-“Wobbly” organizations

I recently learned that you also were once a steely-eyed killer of the deep (submarine sailor). I was pleased but not surprised; courage, logic, and panache (once hallmarks of the US Submariner) permeate your work.

In a recent blog post or Plodcast, you exhorted us to ensure that those to whom we give are not “wobbly.” I’m confident I know what you mean. However, do you have recommendations of groups that qualify (at least for the moment) as non-wobbly?

Thanks for all you do.

Scott

Scott, apart from the stalwart ministries out here, of course, I have in mind organizations like American Vision.

Default Lies in the Stars

Honest question here: do you think the American government could ever truly default on its loans? Most people I’ve talked to don’t seem to think it’s a genuine possibility due to the dire consequences it would entail. What circumstances do you think could lead to this? Thanks!

Justin

Justin, the circumstance that would lead to it is that of not having any more money. And the consequences would be dire. But if you have spent yourself into the corner, then you are in the corner.

You Are Most Welcome

This is just a thank you note to you, Mr. Doug Wilson.

My name is Samuel and I am a Christian from Chandigarh, India. Being raised in a semi-lukewarm theologically-starved Christian family in North India, I came to faith in Jesus in College (St. Stephen’s College, New Delhi) when wrestling with intellectual questions of apologetics and existential questions of meaning. Around the time of my conversion God used the people who were discipling me to bring me to the teaching ministry of people like Tim Keller, John Piper and the Gospel Coalition. And by God’s sovereign grace I was justified when I put faith in Jesus’ atoning work. It took me a while to figure out what really was happening to me and Scripture began to teach me to think in its terms as to describe the new desires I had found in myself. I had been introduced to the Reformed faith by the man who was disciplining me (his name is Robin) and the resources from Desiring God and the like were a great blessing. Yet, it was only when I joined the University for a Masters programme that I became aware of the distinctive glories of the Doctrines of Grace and the Reformation Solas passed down to us by the Reformers. It was 2018, one year after the 500 years and various online ministries were pumping out content surrounding the Reformation. Also, I had just broken up with my first ever girlfriend who had been Roman Catholic. Coming from an Episcopalian background, I didn’t know there were distinct differences, yet after I had been converted I soon realized that our relationship couldn’t continue. After the break up, God united my heart to fear his name! He consolidated the five solas and the TULIP in my heart so that I believed it with all my heart and mind. I got a copy of the Westminster Confession (by G I Williamson). Dr. R C Sproul and Dr. John MacArthur among others have been a great help in clarifying many of these important doctrines. Yet, there was something missing.

Soon, I found myself reading and listening to pastor Paul Washer and Dr. Voddie Baucham on Biblical Manhood. This was something no one ever told me! I knew I was a man but no one ever taught me to apply the Bible, unashamedly with regards to these issues. The problem passages in Titus and 1, 2 Timothy were shoved in my mind’s basement until now. I knew this was an area to grow in.

Then I met Canon Press on Youtube. I’ve grown so much since I discovered your Youtube channel, blog since December and resources of others like pastor Tom Ascol, Jeff Durbin, James White.

Now, I have a vision for my family. I know I’m made to work and protect. And this is good. And God’s will for me. I’m 22. Want to be married by 24. Thankfully, our Indian Culture is way more conservative than what I hear you addressing in your talks, yet it lacks a Biblical Foundation. We must preach the Gospel.

One more thing I want to thank you for is awakening my eyes to political realities. My college environment is highly leftist and I used to lap it up without question before but through your ministry and some other thoughtful Christians, I’m beginning to see how much cultural Marxism and promiscuity and feminism is infected even the conservative (Hindu) Indian Culture. I’m called to live in this tension and proclaim the Good News of Jesus.

Right now, I’m a student of Mathematics. I’m working hard to prepare to apply for a PhD. Right now, I’m discipling younger men at my college and teaching them the same things that I’ve learnt and teaching them to teach it to others. I’m also helping some of the sisters on my campus to disciple other women. I don’t know if God has called me to be a pastor yet, but I love to teach the Bible and aspire to all the things in Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3. Nonetheless, the goal is to become a professor of Mathematics and to disciple young men in the church in India where there is so much theological illteracy (but tech is changing that). The goal also is to raise a family of faithful Christians who will carry on this legacy in the generations to come. Also, I’ve been deliberating the idea of a Christian University here in India where all of the academic subjects are taught from a Christian Worldview, taking inspiration from New Saint Andrews College and The Masters University.

I want to thank you for your Chestertonian Calvinism. Thank for the whole ministry of Christ Church. Thank you to pastor Toby, pastor Ben and pastor Aaron and Ben Zornes and all the others. Thanks to sister Rachel and sister Rebekah and ma’am Nancy. Thanks for Ploductivity. Thanks for everything.

Samuel

Samuel, you are most welcome, and may God richly bless your endeavors and your life.

120
Leave a Reply

avatar
 
10 Comment threads
110 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
JonathanThe Commenter Formerly Known As fpWilliamJaneDCL Recent comment authors

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
DCL
Member
DCL

The Internet Archive is a valuable resource but their capture of Aaron Ginn’s piece in Medium.com failed to grab the graphics, which is a serious compromise. You can see the entire UPDATED piece – with the graphics – here:
https://www.zerohedge.com/health/covid-19-evidence-over-hysteria

Jane
Member

Just spent way too long reading that. Wow. And the Twitter refutation they included for reference consisted mostly of pointing and laughing at Ginn for not being in the in-crowd, and for doing statistical analysis of the information provided by epidemiologists without being one. There were some good takedowns of the refutation within the thread.

I hope he’s right. The implications of him being right aren’t all great, but better than the alternative.

Nathan Tuggy
Member
Nathan Tuggy

Yeah, the refutation was pretty disappointing, although admittedly a lot of that was just the fault of Twitter’s awful format. It was maybe 50% status posturing, 40% plausible critiques of non-central points, and 0% actual refutation of the core of the argument itself. Status posturing isn’t always objectively wrong, of course: experts are experts for a reason, and it’s certainly true that most fields have some aspects that baffle or mislead any newcomer, but it’s all too easy for almost anyone to get caught up more in defending their position in society than in establishing what’s actually true and why.… Read more »

Jane
Member

Yeah, a little status posturing could legitimately be called “establishing credibility” and explaining why expertise is needed on a complex subject. But this was way beyond that.

Jane
Member

The best rebuttal was when someone observed that he got really exercised over calling something that rises for a while, stops rising, and then begins to decrease a “bell curve,” while not denying the trend. That was the most amusing, not necessarily the most effective or substantive.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I didn’t see too much to disagree with substantially in his data. Though I’m not an expert many of the things he was saying agreed with other data I’d seen.

The implications of that data, and how he jumped from the data to his conclusions, seemed to be left out of the paper. I wonder if that’s a product of his involvement in marketing or whatever his background was rather than science – he’s taking the evidence and trends and then playing on his hunches rather than having to rigorously connected the data and other evidence to his conclusions.

DCL
Member
DCL

Thing about Twitter is it’s so – how you say – edifying.

Amanda Wells
Guest
Amanda Wells
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

The great Mike, his wits obviously about him, reasoned thusly:

“The White House should be as panicked as they have the wits to be!!!!!!”

Let’s find out what that dusty old dictionary has to say:

Definition of panic:
1b: a sudden unreasoning terror often accompanied by mass flight

Definition of wit:
3a: reasoning power

Mike, since your wit is rapier than that of the average deplorable, tell us what you think of the following:

– Jumbo shrimp
– Alone together
– Cheerful pessimist
– Larger half
– Scalding coolness
– Beggarly riches
– Melancholy merriment
– Falsely true

DCL
Member
DCL

“rapier” is a noun.
Jus sayin…

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

DCL, in this case, “rapier” is wordplay on an adjective.

DCL
Member
DCL

But of course.

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

Dictionary.com offers the following definition of panic: “a sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause.” That aside, neither you nor Doug responded to my central point which, just for clarity, I will restate: We’re in the middle of a full blown crisis that is going to get worse before it gets better. This is not the time to have in the White House a self absorbed narcissist who makes policy based on personal loyalty and who publicly cuts the legs out from under the experts at every opportunity. I get that you prefer his policies to those of the Democrats.… Read more »

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

Mike, the definitions I posted are from Merriam-Webster. They serve to illustrate my point nicely, which is:

If you’re going to begin your rant with a witless oxymoron, then your opinions, such as they are, don’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

And the definition I posted is from dictionary.com. So?

OK, I will accept your concession that you don’t have a substantive response to my main point.

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

That I choose not to cast my pearls before swine is not indicative of any lack of jewelry on my part.

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

That you claim to have jewelry doesn’t mean I don’t recognize paste when I see it. It’s almost impossible to write anything that someone can’t find a minor quibble with. Maybe there could have been a better word choice, or maybe a word is misused, or maybe the spelling and punctuation are wrong. As guest above pointed out, you yourself misused the word rapier, so you might want to have a quick look at Matthew 7:2.. And at the end of the day, all of that is just a BS excuse to not respond to the actual points being made.… Read more »

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

Mike, how would you know what kind of jewelry I have if I haven’t cast it? Have you been huffing paste again? However, I do have a concession to make: I concede that you do not have a substantive main point. Attempting to psychologically profile (without a license, no less!) the President of the United States and non-sequiturs (Won’t Someone Think Of The Children?™) do not an argument make. Can’t respond substantively if there ain’t any substance there to begin with, pal. If you have criticisms of how President Trump is handling this China virus panic based on actual decisions… Read more »

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

Whatever jewelry you may have left at home, all you’ve brought to this discussion is paste. And I don’t need a medical degree to diagnose narcissism when Mr. Trump goes to such great lengths to put it on display.

But you know what? Nothing I’m going to say is going to change your closed little mind, so as I suggested earlier, let’s have this conversation again in about a month or so and see how things look then.

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

OK, I will accept your concession that you don’t have any substantive criticism of President Trump.

Oh, and by the way:

It’s illegal to practice psychology without a license. However, since we’ve already established that you’re not a serious person, go ahead and play doctor all you want.

William
Guest
William

Mike, don’t let it bother you too much. These folks are great at straining gnats and swallowing camels. When pressed with a reasonable question for which the correct answer flies in the face of their doctrine and dogma, and most importantly their leader, they love to drag you down the rabbit hole where no queer logic is strange.

It might help if you picture the silly dude you’ve been sparring with in one of those Trump costumes they wear to his rallies. The best response is laughter.

Nathan James
Member

I’m sorry – your central point is that you hate Trump? And you expect someone to address that?

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

No, my central point is that whatever my feelings toward Trump may be, he is completely unsuited to leadership during a crisis. As I told Mr. Paste Necklace above, let’s have this conversation again in a month or so and see how things look then.

Nathan Smith
Member

So to play buttinski, but which poor children don’t have healthcare? Being a poor child pretty much gets you healthcare in the USA.

OKRickety
Member

Mike Freeman, “This is not the time to have in the White House a self absorbed narcissist who makes policy based on personal loyalty and who publicly cuts the legs out from under the experts at every opportunity.” In case you’ve never understood this, the President is not a dictator. In other words, there are many people involved in the decisions made by the government, oftentimes ones you would never suspect. I suggest you watch an episode or two of the British series “Yes, Minister”, based on the premise that the elected official appointed as “Minister” is opposed by the… Read more »

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

Put in your earplugs; you’re about to hear some screeching from the left:

Before China Bat Soup Flu: Trump is acting like a dictator!

During China Bat Soup Flu: Trump needs to act like a dictator!

JP Stewart
Member

As for Mike caring about health care for poor children, why not just abort them? The no worries about health care, COVID-19 or anything else. Anyone with a decent chance of beating Trump will be decidedly pro-abortion. In fact, it’s basically the sacrament for the Democrats, along with LGBQT+.

JP Stewart
Member

LOL, two thumbs-down in like 15 minutes. Not that I care personally, but apparently the silent left-wing mobs frequent this site, too. Oh well, I’d rather them be here than giving bogus bad ratings to books, businesses, etc. owned by conservative Christians. That’s happened to quite a few people I know.

Mike Freeman
Guest
Mike Freeman

I voted you down because of your blatant what-aboutism. Saying “what about abortion” has nothing to do with the entirely separate question of whether poor children should have health care.

JP Stewart
Member

Wow, bringing up logical fallacies after that “letter” you wrote? So you don’t want to answer the question? Are you willing to vote for a pro-abortion candidate or not?

JP Stewart
Member

Speaking of fallacies, the statement “Even if the alternative was that poor children have health care” is a blatant appeal to pity. That wasn’t the primary issue for most people voting in 2016.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Pastor Wilson, if you think Prime Minister Modi is concerned about looking “compassionate” and that that’s driving his shutdown policy, then you really are clueless regarding Indian politics. I thought by this point that Modi’s quite public history and actions both past and present were already well-known throughout the Christian community? It’s not a requirement that a pastor in Idaho have a basic understanding of Indian politics, but probably a good idea to at least try before writing a post about it. Also, you apparently taking India’s reported coronavirus caseload at face value is just silly. They have 1.3 billion… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

God told Joseph to have the Egyptians collect harvests for 7 fat years and that would enable them to survive 7 lean ones with no difficulty. God told Moses to have the Israelites rest from their harvests for an entire year once every seven years, and they would be fine. America is currently the wealthiest nation in human history, and by a good margin. If we can’t even rest from work for 3 weeks without demanding that people rush back to work regardless of medical advice in order to “save the economy”, then I’d suggest that’s not a Godly economy.… Read more »

prayersofadoration
Member

Most folks live paycheck to paycheck. Our government is way beyond that having mortgaged everything it can get its hands on. None of this is Godly. Saving the economy is thus a dubious goal but please remember that we are the economy. It’s not just some abstract habitation of the rich.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

“Most folks”? Most? Maybe, but why?

Jane
Member

Because that is the way the world mostly works and has always mostly worked for most people. The kind of affluence that expects that the average person, let alone a significant number of people below average, should have a nest egg, is both recent and anomalous. Yes, much of this is driven by poor choices. Even without that, most of it would still be driven by the human condition — not everybody makes a lot more than they need.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

However, we’re not talking about the world mostly, but the world of contemporary America. The kind of affluence that would allow the average person to have a some kind of nest egg might be recent, as in for about the last 75 years, nonetheless it is the reality for most Americans.

-BJ-
Guest
-BJ-

Jane,

I don’t disagree with your bigger point, but in the West the vast majority of people earn and have far, far more than their daily needs.

JP Stewart
Member

It depends what you mean. Most Americans (including those who don’t work but max out Fed/state welfare programs) live much more affluent lifestyles than the rest of the world on average. But many of them still live paycheck to paycheck and aren’t prepared for an economic downturn. The people in this group with higher salaries might be able to drastically cut spending, sell some luxury items and survive for a while. But you’d be surprised how many middle and even upper-middle class people have little to nothing in emergency funds, long-term savings, retirement accounts, etc.

-BJ-
Guest
-BJ-

JP, I am not sure to whom you were responding, but you touch on something important. Almost no Americans or even Westerners are bordering on the minimum of daily needs. We have far more then we need. The reason people live paycheck to paycheck is straight-forwardly over-consumption or plain mismanagement. If one is in a catastrophe over this slowdown right now, it simply shows how badly we steward our cultural inheritance. My grandfather never once borrowed money. His 3rd grade education meant he never earned more than the equivalent of $30,000 in today’s money in a single year. My grandmother… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

BJ, I was replying to you and those are all good points. The bottom line is there aren’t many people willing to cook and eat a lot of rice and beans right now. I’m again talking about people who live on food stamps/welfare/SSI/etc. as well as minimum wage employees and very low-level gov’t workers. I dealt with these people directly in a past life and most of them thought at least one fast food combo meal a day (along with overpriced snacks from vending machines or gas stations ) were a God-given right…some of them spent more money on food… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

I wouldn’t be surprised at all. The point is, for those people it’s a choice until it becomes a necessity because it was a choice.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

And I’m asking why, and if that’s not evidence of something quite unGodly about our economic model.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I don’t think that’s actually true, and it certainly shouldn’t be true in a nation with as much wealth as ours. As I pointed out before, the Old Testament suggests that having enough in the 6th year to save for the 7th should be a regular outcome in a blessed situation. Even in many much worse situations, being able to survive seasonal changes in income, droughts, floods, etc. is a normal thing. Heck, today you can go to India and it’s not unusual for POOR people to take a month off to visit family or attend a festival. And that’s… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

The majority do take in enough in the 6th year to save for the 7th. Some just don’t do that. The why is, all the reasons people have been citing here.

Jane
Member

The things that the Old Testament suggested as the blessings of prosperity pretty much never came true, because people in general are not faithful enough to the the God who superintends the blessings. So yes, it’s a “should” on one level, but it’s not a normal expectation that we’ll actually see it, and it’s not a uniquely modern problem that we don’t.

prayersofadoration
Member

Why? Because we’re wicked, basically. Too concerned with present indulgence. It doesn’t help that there are whole industries dedicated to exploiting this.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

You touch on a big piece of it. Our economy is based on debts with interest (by necessity, money enters the system via debt), and thus there is always more interest to pay off than money available in the system. This creates a system that needs constant growth to survive. Thus entire industries are built telling people to consume, consume, consume, borrow, borrow, borrow, and then spend an inordinate amount of advertising and social pressure in order to feed this machine. They are afraid that if we don’t have constant growth, the whole facade will collapse…which it will. As the… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

True, but this started long ago. You can trace some if back to the early 20th Century but things really got messed up around 2008-9 when the gov’t and Federal Reserve were willing to do anything to paper over the problems. This is also when debt levels really took off. https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1960_2021USb_XXs2li111mcn_H0f This was the period of massive bailouts of certain banks (while others were allowed to fail), 7 years of zero interest rates (we’re back to that again), TARP, other stimulus, multiple rounds of quantitative easing, etc. It got to the point where we’d do anything to stave off another… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

We are literally the wealthiest country on Earth. 110 trillion in assets before this downturn. So why do most folk live paycheck to paycheck? Doesn’t that suggest something unGodly about the economy?

And outside of massive debts (which, again, seem to me to be unGodly), the support bill just passed should be taking care of those paycheck-to-paycheck people. So what’s the problem?

JP Stewart
Member

You can’t bring up assets without mentioning liabilities. That’s Accounting 101 stuff.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

But JP, the very nature of our system is that there HAS to be more liabilities than assets overall. Money enters the system as loans with interest, there will always be more money owed than was ever put into the system. Thus there is always indebtedness, always profiteering based on interest, always enormous pressure to grow-grow-grow and consume-consume-consume. Aren’t those inherently negative aspects of an economy that wishes to align itself with God’s desires for our lives?

demosthenes1d
Member

Jonathan, I agree with some of what you are saying here, but this “there HAS to be more liabilities than assets” isn’t right. It is arguably true for broad measures of money supply. But not for all assets. That is one of the beautiful things about a functional economy, it actually creates and sustains wealth. If I hire someone to build my house and take out a loan to do so. After completing the payment of the craftsmen and material suppliers, etc. and the repayment of the loan, the asset still sits there, somewhat depreciated perhaps in real capital value.… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Yes, Demo, that is of course true, but I was speaking of broad measures of money supply, which I believe was the topic of conversation. There is far more money owed than is available in the system. For each to pay off their obligations, they either have to outcompete their fellows (thus causing them to come up short in their own repayments), or borrow more money. Since money borrowed comes with interest, thus making the obligations greater than the money borrowed, there’s no way to get the money too pay the obligations without creating greater obligations. No one can complain… Read more »

Jane
Member

To be clear, I’m not saying the way the US economy operates, and the way people live, is hunky dory. I just don’t think you can make it as simple as saying that if we hadn’t been doing this or that thing wrong, we wouldn’t need to worry about what happens when there is a radical loss of productivity in a worldwide economy that supports 8 billion people. It’s not a normal expectation that if we just weren’t so in love with debt or didn’t feel the need for a fancy lifestyle, things wouldn’t be so bad despite world economic… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

So otherwise, what would be the problem Jane? Considering that all our resources are still here, all our production capacity is still here, all our workers are still here, all our infrastructure is still here, and our wealth is unmatched, what would be the actual problem with the economy taking a break for a month?

If it was for debt, interest, and the need for stockholders and debtors to profit off of other people’s work, there would be no inherent issue with a one or two month break. Nothing fundamental goes missing in that time.

Jane
Member

Because without a way to earn something to trade for their food, the family has no way to get the food that’s sitting there. Unless you expect the people with the food just to give it away, and then those people are e going to have a problem with maintaining their shelter. Too much of the world depends on producing what have been deemed “non-essential” goods and services to provide a living for themselves, even for “just swap stuff around” to be a solution, even if that were ever going to be something that could happen in the real world.… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Again, you’re expressing a fundamental problem with the system that has been there for some time. We have a system that easily produces enough essential goods for everyone. Productivity continuously goes up up up because of labor-saving devices, we really should be working 20-30 hour weeks at most and spending the rest of the time with family, ministry, volunteering, creative endeavors, etc. But the fundamentals of our current system insist that those labor-saving benefits won’t actually accrue to the people who are doing the labor, instead those at the top continuously monopolize more and more of the fruits while trying… Read more »

Jane
Member

The world has achieved a situation where it does not require the constant labor of every person to provide for the basic needs of every person. That’s a feature, not a bug. When non-survival economic activity is suddenly cut off for reasons not arising directly out of the needs and desires of individuals to engage in it, you have a whole lot of people who have nothing to exchange for their needs. It’s not more complicated than that, and there is nothing inherently corrupt in that reality.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Oh, I agree it is a feature, not a bug. The wealthy who control the system wish to ensure that advances in technology and benefits in productivity will accrue almost entirely to them and not to their workers. Anything that increased fairness or freedom for the workers would reduce how much they could be controlled. That’s why over 95% of real (inflation-adjusted) income increases over the last 40 years have accrued to the wealthy while working-class and middle-class wages stagnant. You would think that a system which requires pastors to beg to restart the economy even while admitting that may… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Joseph sold stored up grain to the Egyptians. In our case, what should the government sell to Americans?

DCL
Member
DCL

Lies.
Americans love them.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Health and security.

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

Security – I’m thinking of things like national defense, law enforcement, emergency services, and public health/safety codes could be included – is exactly what government sells to the taxpayer. Of course value for the money can be debated, and it varies from time to time and place to place.

Not sure if you meant anything like that though.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

That’s what I’m referring to – the government is saying, “In this time of pandemic, we have to take a tax to ensure the health and security of the nation.” No different than a war tax or a Joseph taking grain off the top for 7 years in order to cover the famine.

Jane
Member

The government can’t ensure the health of the nation. They have nothing to give that does that. They can (arguably) make laws that to some degree promote it, but they can’t “give” it in exchange for something else, in any way.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I’m not sure you understand my point because you’re reaching to some abstract level. In order to ensure the health and security of the nation in a time of pandemic, the government has to tax the excess wealth of the population in order to ensure that basic needs are met across the board. Without this assurance, there is too great a danger of people compromising the health/security of the nation out of desperation to meet basic needs. As Pastor Wilson has insisted, protecting national safety during a pandemic is part of the government’s righteous duties, and of course it is… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

“In order to ensure the health and security of the nation in a time of pandemic, the government has to tax the excess wealth of the population in order to ensure that basic needs are met across the board. ”

Agenda noted. You could’ve spared a lot of typing and just said that.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Do you have an objection to that agenda?

In his essay, Pastor Wilson suggested that we may have to send people back to work to get the economy going even if that means more people will die, because tradeoffs.

I’m suggesting that there is far more than enough excess wealth in this nation that we could get people through the duration adequately without forcing more people to die than necessary, and we’ll still still have all our economic fundamentals when we come out.

Which of those sides do you fall on? If you see a whole in my argument, feel free to contribute.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Again, as I noted, this is literally something that Joseph did at God’s direction. He taxed from seven years of excess so that he could provide for seven years of famine.

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

JP,

“…the government has to tax the excess wealth of the population…”
— From each according to his ability,

“…to ensure that basic needs are met across the board.”
— To each according to his needs.

I know I heard that somewhere before, but I can’t quite put my finger on it…

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Note how FP ignores the Bible. As always, he’s more concerned with what other posters think than what the Word of God says. Besides the obvious example of Joseph (which he will continue to ignore despite its clear similarities), he may also notice that this statement from Paul is far closer to what I said than his random mumbling: Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you… Read more »

Jane
Member

How is health’s the government’s, or anyone’s, to sell?

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

(Of course, there would be far far more public resources that the government “could” have sold just like Joseph did, but for the most part it’s already given those away for nothing at the bidding of well-heeled lobbyists so it doesn’t have that option.)

Jane
Member

The economy IS people’s lives. How do people not understand that? The economy is not “the way rich people make money.” The economy is simply the word for all the productive functions upon which a material price can be put, in the aggregate. That includes things like earning enough money to eat, having a place to live, having a way to pay for any medical care whatsoever for anyone, BY anyone, etc. Equating “the economy” with “stock market performance” is extremely simplistic and frankly dismissive of other people’s lives.

JP Stewart
Member

” Equating ‘the economy’ with ‘stock market performance’ is extremely simplistic and frankly dismissive of other people’s lives.”

Yep, but a surprising number of people do just that.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I agree. Which is why I dismiss Pastor Wilson’s concerns about the stock market. When this shutdown ends, unless the virus is far worse than we think, all the fundamentals of the economy will still be in place. The resources, infrastructure, workers, systems, they’re all there. So what will stop the economy from being started again at the end of the shutdown? The most important issue, of course, is that vulnerable people can survive the duration of the shutdown. The bill that Congress passed appears to address that decently well, and there is so much wealth in this nation that… Read more »

Jane
Member

Just because the stockmarket is not the core of the concern, does not mean it is not an indicator and is not relevant to the discussion.

The bill that Congress passed will probably help most people weather the weeks or months that things remain shutdown. It won’t deal with the phenomenal loss of economic productivity that is occurring, that is going to negatively affect people’s livelihoods for some time to come.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Why though? Why do you feel that economic productivity wouldn’t be able to ramp up to previous levels after the crisis is over? What specifically will be missing from the economy that will keep that from happening?

I know what the answer is, I just want to see who is willing to say it out loud. Because it’s not at all unpreventable, it’s only a question of what those with power actually want.

-BJ-
Guest
-BJ-

Jonathan, I more or less agree with you. We have totally thrown out the Sabbath rest. We basically consider credit a necessity. And cell phone are considered needs. Despite our vast wealth, we live on the edge of poverty. We do so, not because of circumstances forcing us, but because most people consume nearly everything they can get their hands on. We eat and drink more in our daily lives than people ate in 3 days about 100 years ago. Don’t get me started on how we spend for entertainment and housing. If we would control our consumption, we could… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I absolutely agree BJ. The entire issue emerges from overconsumption. And while gluttony/greed are fundamental human sins, I also believe that we have an economy that explicitly encourages those sins due to its need for constant growth.

It all goes back to loans at interest. Which the Bible repeatedly warns us about and which we ignore.

JP Stewart
Member

There are a few problems with oversimplifying this to “It’s the system, man. Just get rid of interest on loans.” 1) People still have agency. As a society, we’ve been willing to be enslaved to debt to live above our means. People are responsible for this individually. 2. Similar to quoting “aliens and strangers” verses to support lax immigraton policy, singling out loan interest is selective theonomy. Why should we follow this but not other civil laws? What’s the interpretive framework for determining which laws to follow? As for immigration, open borders proponents never mention Lev. 24:10-17. A half-Egyptian gets… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I do not practice selective theonomy. God has not changed, his desires for the best life for us are always there. When looking at any of the laws, the questions relevant are – why did God command this, did Jesus emphasize this or give us a new, deeper way to carry out those intentions, and how do I live in those intentions today? In terms of interest, it is clear – God commanded us not to do it because it is exploitative of others. The issue (as in Leviticus 25:35+) is that you are profiting off of your brother’s needs.… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

That’s still selective theonomy. Jesus said he didn’t come to abolish the law. He never said we could fully read God’s mind and figure out why he commanded certain things…or if I (Jesus) say something about it, it remains in force. Your framework is still full of assumptions and possible holes (like all Campolo-esque “red letter” approaches). What about sodomy–thoroughly condemned in both the OT and NT? Should there be laws (whether capital punishment or something else) against it? What about capital punishment in general? Why or why not…and for what crimes? We’ll see how consistent this is when it… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I’m having a hard time imagining you and I having a productive discussion on this front, so I’ll produce a stand-in for my position. The Moral Vision of the New Testament by Richard Hays is the most Biblical book I’ve read on New Testament ethics. Trevin Wax has strong “conservative” credentials, so he can be your stand-in and Hays will be mine. Read through Trevor’s interaction with Hays’s text, see if we can agree on what the New Testament teaches, and then we can use that mutual understanding to understand how to interpret the Old.

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevin-wax/the-moral-vision-of-the-new-testament/

Matt
Guest
Matt

Every coronavirus post you make is worse than the last one. The latest one sneers at India for instituting a lockdown with only 500 documented cases. One can only wonder what you think a lockdown is for. In Doug Wilson world, you only institute measures intended to slow the spread of a virus after it has already spread. This must be that generalist wisdom you were so keen on. The talk about relaxing the restrictions to help the economy misses two big factors. The first is that we have something of a pandemic going on. It isn’t as though the… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

I’m most interested in what Pastor Wilson thinks is motivating India’s shutdown. He seems to blame it on “every leader trying to out-compassion the other” or something to that effect. I’m pretty sure that the Prime Minister Modi who has violently put down several riots this year and is currently having police beat people in the streets in order to force them to obey curfew, the same Modi who presided over the Gujarat Riots which killed thousands of people, is not actually concerned with “out-compassioning” anyone. Especially when there was not a general cry for a shutdown from the people,… Read more »

Ken B
Guest
Ken B

Personally I don’t think anyone regardless of political hue should be using this pandemic to make political points. It still bothers me to see evangelicals defending some kind of religious right to hold “services” when there is a very real chance of spreading disease for which their country is blatantly not prepared. Germany is about as prepared for this crisis (I know the word is over-used these days) as any, but the collective and sober wisdom of those with the necessary expertise is that its healthcare system could yet be overwhelmed by coronas sufferers. DW’s friend Peter Hitchens has been… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

“Personally I don’t think anyone regardless of political hue should be using this pandemic to make political points. ”

Ask Pelosi why she wanted to add huge $$ amounts of left-leaning pork that had nothing to do with stimulus. Both parties have their problems but that was a new low.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

You sound very silly to claim that business as usual in Congress is a “new low”. The Republicans were trying to push business deregulation and the Hyde Amendment into the bill at the same time. Of course, both sides will claim that their own priorities are either in some way essential to the recovery or so important they cannot be ignored, because each side views its objectives as more essential than the other side’s objectives. This happens with literally every bill.

Jane
Member

They weren’t trying to “push the Hyde amendment into the bill.” The Hyde amendment already exists. They were trying to prevent the bill from having an irrelevant accretion that gutted the Hyde amendment.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Do you have any evidence for such an attempt by Democrats to “gut the Hyde Amendment” beyond the Daily Caller? Yes, the Hyde Amendment already exists, which is why explicitly putting it into the bill was obviously a political move. There was also language in the bill that extended it to explicitly ban Planned Parenthood from receiving funding. That language is not in the Hyde Amendment. “Have been pouring over the text of the relief bill. I’m not happy negotiators took out language that excluded Planned Parenthood from receiving government subsidies. But I have been assured Planned Parenthood will still… Read more »

JP Stewart
Member

Depending what it’s for, deregulation could stimulate the economy. Abortion, silly green energy projects (see all the failures and fiascos in the Obama era) and the many other things in Pelosi’s package clearly won’t.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

The idea that you think that Republicans aren’t being partisan when they remove EPA regulation during the crisis at the explicit request of fossil fuel companies and then refuse to give a deadline extension to renewable energy projects that are likely to miss required completion deadlines due to the lack of staffing is laughable. And I still haven’t seen any citation beyond The Daily Caller that “abortion” of any sort was in the bill. Anyway, I don’t see anything productive in continuing this conversation. The vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have proven again and again that… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

For a timely example:

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/489753-epa-suspends-enforcement-of-environmental-laws-amid-coronavirus

If you really think coronavirus precautions force those companies to dump toxic waste into our water, then I’ve got a story about Love Canal to sell you.

Jane
Member

You realize that all violations of the millions of pages of environmental regulations are not “dumping toxic waste into our water,” right? If you can’t wrap your head around why Coronavirus restrictions don’t make compliance harder, then you have no idea how industry works. A large amount of non-compliance that companies get dinged for is failure to file paperwork. I’ll leave it to you to think about how government-imposed Coronavirus procedures might make it more difficult for a company that normally has people dedicated just to verifying things and filing the appropriate paperwork, to follow through. Especially when non-essential industries… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Yes, everything is tougher in a pandemic. That doesn’t mean that we stop following rules to product the environment and our health. If you haven’t noticed, the Trump Administration has already spent 3+ years absolutely gutting environmental regulation, weakening rules that go all the way back to 1972. And the idea that Trump’s EPA would go around looking to get companies during the pandemic is a joke. Are you aware of how few cases they’ve launched? As of 2018 it had already fallen to 30-year lows, I’m sure right when the 2019 numbers come in they’ll be even worse and… Read more »

Jane
Member

“Everything is tougher in a pandemic.” That means it’s just to fine people for not following technical procedures that don’t actually make the water cleaner or keep it from becoming dirtier, precisely because the government is creating other rules that make it impossible to follow them? Okay.

Jane
Member

Also, I don’t find it a “joke” that civil servant regulators who are thankful to have a job to show up to do everyday wouldn’t stop doing their jobs, if their job is “compliance assurance officer for industry XYZ.” Why a pandemic would stop them from doing that is not clear to me. While the administration’s general approach has been to relax regulation, Trump isn’t personally calling up low level regulators telling them to stop fining people for not filing the form certifying that they didn’t spill excess water while hosing down the outside of the building. Precisely because of… Read more »

Jane
Member

Further, this is a moratorium on enforcement of procedural regulations, NOT a decriminalization of actually damaging activity. Anybody who dumps anything that’s not supposed to go somewhere, is just as liable as before.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

That’s false.

Jane
Member

Can you cite me a source for it being anything other than a pause in enforcement? Pausing enforcement doesn’t meant it ceases to be a crime, which means it can always be pursued later.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

The original link. Read it.

Jane
Member

It says its a suspension of enforcement right in the original link.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

And you didn’t read the article to see what that actually meant? “This EPA statement is essentially a nationwide waiver of environmental rules for the indefinite future. It tells companies across the country that they will not face enforcement even if they emit unlawful air and water pollution in violation of environmental laws, so long as they claim that those failures are in some way ’caused’ by the virus pandemic. And it allows them an out on monitoring too, so we may never know how bad the violating pollution was,” she wrote in a statement to The Hill. – Cynthia… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

When you google you find the same take virtually across the board, from everyone except industry lobbyists (who, now that they got exactly what they explicitly asked for, would rather pretend that they didn’t ask for that). I looked in vain to find a legitimate source that was also one you would actually believe, in the end I had to settle for Fox News, which repeated much the same information in the above link as well as: The temporary enforcement discretion policy is open-ended and applies to civil violations, although leniency for intentional criminal violations of law will not be… Read more »

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
Guest
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp

Jane, sorry I’m a little late to the party, but what you said is true. As usual, Jonathan simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about. From the EPA’s memorandum, COVID-19 Implications for EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program, March 26, 2020: The enforcement discretion described in this temporary policy do not apply to any criminal violations or conditions of probation in criminal sentences. Appropriate consideration of potential criminal liability is discussed separately, below. Same memo, section V. – Criminal Violations (page 7): The considerations described above apply to the vast majority of people and businesses who are making good faith… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Your claims were already addressed before, FP. The EPA virtually never closes criminal cases against polluters under any circumstances. Even in the PFOA disaster when thousands of people saw their lives destroyed by a chemical that DuPont knew was deadly, the EPA only imposed civil penalties. Saying “but criminal charges are still possible even though we’ve waived civil penalties” is a joke when the EPA in general and the Trump EPA in particular simply doesn’t put polluters in jail even in normal circumstances.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

And if you want the ultimate in “using the pandemic to make political points”: https://twitter.com/Phil_Mattingly/status/1245836495702933504/photo/1 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8162097/Donald-Trump-demands-governors-APPRECIATIVE-coronavirus-response.html * Refers to a governor asking for help as a “failed presidential candidate”. * Quotes election numbers of governors asking for help. * Tells VP Pence not to make calls to governors who “aren’t appreciative” * Says he refuses to call back governors who don’t “treat me right” * Refers to “impeachment hoax” in an official White House letter to a senator asking for help * Refers to his own poll numbers in same letter * Claims AOC would beat the senator in a… Read more »

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

“For myself I find the panic, and the mockery and unpersoning (by people who jolly well should know better) of those questioning the severity of the pandemic and the warrant for the response, far more frightening than the virus itself. As of today there have yet to be 300 persons sent off to this judgement with this virus as God’s instrument, if the official stats are correct. This is “extremely rare form of cancer” or “slipped in the tub and broke your neck” territory.” The actual # of people killed by the virus to this point is 27,000+, and that’s… Read more »

JohnM
Guest
JohnM

The latest number I have read (CDC) was 1246 deaths in the U.S. Whatever the number, to a focus only only on that statistic actually misses the severity of impact. The really massive problem is not the number of people who succumb but the number who are hospitalized, regardless of outcome, overwhelming the hospitals, taking up bed space and other resources. Now would be a particularly bad time to slip in the bathtub and break a rib instead of your neck.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

And a focus on that number also misses the acceleration in the toll. That 1246 statistic is just two days out of date. Yet once they finish compiling yesterday’s numbers the US death toll will be over 2,000. Which means in two weeks it could be….?

And the hospital burden you note is just beginning some places and hasn’t touched most places. If the projections are correct, in 1-2 weeks it will be much worse.

Mike Bowgren
Member
Mike Bowgren

Jonathan said:
“ With the way some of you talk about these issues and your lack of willingness to trust scientists or visible trends, I have trouble seeing how you would ever respond to a similar crisis until after it was already too late.”

Given that logic, I suppose it’s high time we listened to the scientists with regard to global warming, trans-gendering, et al, eh? Nothing says made-up-panic quite like the alarmist trend of the sky is falling, the sky is falling.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

So first off, answer the question. Under what circumstances would you ever be willing to respond to any similar crisis before it was too late? If you don’t believe scientific data on how There were 525 deaths in America yesterday alone. Look at that letter up above that Pastor Wilson published just 4 days ago, mocking the death toll because it was under 300 at the moment. Now it’s well over 2,000 and continuing to accelerate that. If you automatically dismiss anything scientists say, how would you deal with that? I have a friend, a former missionary who served on… Read more »

DCL
Member
DCL

So, every time you come here you spew nothing but negativity and criticism, all from a lofty perch of moral and intellectual superiority. It makes me wonder, do you remember the last time you had any joy?

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

Last time was today. Before that, yesterday. :)

William
Guest
William

You really can’t argue with science deniers. Especially the 6000 year old, flat earth variety.

DCL
Member
DCL

Actually, it’s 6020 years. §(* ̄▽ ̄*)§

William
Guest
William

Thanks for proving my point. You can go back to sleep now.

Jonathan
Guest
Jonathan

These letters were posted barely more than a week ago, and “yet to be 300 persons” total is now a thousand deaths a day. I’ll keep asking the same question that no one will answer. If you don’t trust the scientists and their best projections, then how do you keep yourself from failing to respond until it’s too late?

Is there an answer to this qeustion or not?