Could we create the perfect world?

[Holly-May Leslie]

I am only hurting this thread. So I will do the right thing and Unfollow and Ignore. Carry on.

I don't think you're hurting it that much. How are you hurting it?

 

[billvon]

This is because the circumstances seem to be leading to a dictatorship. That is my only reason for not trusting this vaccine.

I keep hearing this over and over. In what way is pushing out a vaccine "leading to a dictatorship?" The polio vaccine was pushed just as hard, if not harder; did that result in dictatorship? Pretty much everyone is required to buy cars that have seatbelts, horns and brake lights now; does that mean we live in a dictatorship? You have to have a passport to travel internationally, and foreigners need a visa (or similar entry accommodation) to enter. Does all that mean we are living in a dictatorship?

Keep in mind that a dictatorship is a form of government where one person (or a very small number of people) hold absolute power, without elections, constitutional checks or courts to limit or change that power. It does not mean "the government makes me do things I don't like."

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

I keep hearing this over and over. In what way is pushing out a vaccine "leading to a dictatorship?"

I don't think it is. What made you think that I thought that it was?

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

The polio vaccine was pushed just as hard, if not harder; did that result in dictatorship?

I don't know. Did it? I would guess not.

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

I keep hearing this over and over. In what way is pushing out a vaccine "leading to a dictatorship?" The polio vaccine was pushed just as hard, if not harder; did that result in dictatorship? Pretty much everyone is required to buy cars that have seatbelts, horns and brake lights now; does that mean we live in a dictatorship? You have to have a passport to travel internationally, and foreigners need a visa (or similar entry accommodation) to enter. Does all that mean we are living in a dictatorship?

Keep in mind that a dictatorship is a form of government where one person (or a very small number of people) hold absolute power, without elections, constitutional checks or courts to limit or change that power. It does not mean "the government makes me do things I don't like."

The other points sound very dictatorial though, especially the bit about travel. I was under the impression that people could just get their own boats or private helicopters or planes to travel, if they had enough money. Isn't it like that?

 

[billvon]

I don't think it is. What made you think that I thought that it was?

Because you said so. Your words: "This is because the circumstances [around the vaccine] seem to be leading to a dictatorship."

I was under the impression that people could just get their own boats or private helicopters or planes to travel, if they had enough money. Isn't it like that?

Nope.

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

Because you said so. Your words: "This is because the circumstances [around the vaccine] seem to be leading to a dictatorship."

I didn't say so. I thought that some of the circumstances surrounding it, namely the lock downs, seemed to be leading to dictatorship. I did not, however, propose that pushing the vaccine was leading to dictatorship. I think that advocating it is fine.

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

Nope.

Well that should probably change.

 

[billvon]

Well that should probably change.

How would you change it? Should everyone who wants to come in to the US be allowed to do so?

 

[Holly-May Leslie]

How would you change it? Should everyone who wants to come in to the US be allowed to do so?

I would say that people should be able to leave their countries without any kind of external clearance, but that this should not apply to entering countries.
Then again, this might end up with some of them becoming country less. There would probably need to be some way to prevent that.

 

[Bells]

1: That might be true to a very small extent, but babies learn to speak before they go to school without being taught it so...

Babies learn to speak. Ergo, they are taught to speak, and they also mimic their parent(s) or caregiver as a form of 'learning to speak'.

For example, feral children brought up by animals from a young age before their language skills can develop, cannot speak and essentially have to be taught to speak and some are rarely able to develop a vocabulary because those skills that develop at a stage in their earlier years, failed to actually develop [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child].

I'd say that the subject English is more just required for learning how to read and write, and I would also say that it is taught rather well in this particular area. I just think that it is taught badly overall because of all of the extra waffle.

Reading and writing is one thing. Understanding what you are reading and writing, being able to analyse what you read and/or write, you know, what you deem to be "waffle", is another thing altogether. Now, consider why that "waffle" is important.

A person who is sexually attracted to, or inclined to be sexually attracted to people of the opposite gender, without being attracted to those of the same gender, and without being inclined to be so.
That is what. I'll bet you already knew that though.

I know what it means. I just wanted you to explain why you think being heterosexual is "straight" as opposed to someone who is LGBTQI, for example. It's actually quite an offensive term because it implies that not being "straight" is somehow crooked or wrong, for lack of a better term.

Such terms might imply this. Sorry if they did. I don't believe that anyone is crooked or wrong for having any sexuality, despite the implication here. I do believe that some people are crooked and wrong though. That is what I intend to change. I was thinking that a bit of writing along with a bit of money wight change it, if I use these things correctly.

Ah, but for "ENGLISH" lessons..

The use of the term, as addressed above, implies that one is wrong for being homosexual.

And one does not have a sexuality.

As for your comments about how you intend to change things... What do you mean by that? How do you intend to change people you think are crooked or wrong? Who do you think are crooked or wrong?

Fine. Whatever. You win. I was just speculating despite the implication that I was pretending to know what I didn't. Actually, I can see now why being gay or lesbian or bi may have advantages amongst many social species, by strengthening relationships and group dynamics.

You seem to do this "fine, whatever, you win" schtick quite a bit when challenged.

Particularly for someone who intends to change anything, you sure seem to simply cave. And certainly seem to voice your opinions and make factual statements quite liberally, and then try the same gimmick of 'you were just speculating'. So much so that your performance here is tantamount to trolling. You say things to get people to respond and then you pull this stunt. I would also recommend you actually educate yourself before you come out with rubbish like this:

They would probably find the act required gross though, unless they grew the child in a test tube and avoided said act, or adopted. I recommend adoption for gays and lesbians who want children.

For goodness sakes! What a silly thing to say.

No, because I don't consider babies to be fully fledged people, or maybe, in some cases. It depends upon the age of the child.
2: Yet.

What?

Okay. As long as people retain the right to decide who gets to go on THEIR OWN property, that will probably be fine, and beneficial in hindering the spread of the virus.
4: Of course. However, I have an estimation contrary to one of yours. It is that most of the people refusing to get the vaccine are refusing it just because they're scared of it, because of the lock downs and the not being allowed to form groups with more than a certain number of people and all of the other totalitarian bs. To put it into perspective, they're pretty much scared of the vaccine like you are scared of the virus.

What do you think happens during pandemics?

Clearly you haven't studied any history whatsoever, or even international events in the last 10 or so years. When outbreaks occur, they have to contain it and yes, that will mean you can't go visiting family and friends, you have to lock down and you can't meet up with groups and whatnot. The reason is to stop the spread of the disease, which is fairly obvious to most.

In my home state, we lock down if we get a few cases of COVID. You can go to the store, etc. But you can't go visiting people. And if we go out, we wear masks and use check-in apps. The lockdowns usually go for a few days and once the contact tracers have managed to track down everyone who has come into contact with those who are infected, and they are tested and made to quarantine at home, everything opens up. It's because we do it quickly and early on that we haven't had any long lockdown. The reason for lockdown is to prevent more people getting sick and prevent it spreading. And we are damn right afraid of the virus. It's killed over 5 million people in less than 2 years and that's with control measures put in place - sadly too late. When control measures are implemented swiftly, less illness and less death. That is how it works in the real world.

It would if you were smarter.
2: It has taught me how to be one because the teachers were way too bossy and the system was too and there was a ridiculous amount of work to do. I would say that this experience is common to almost every student.
3: Being a real slave would probably be a lot worse and a lot stricter. I don't know much about it, but I know enough to know that I have been taught to be a slave.

Bossy? My kids don't seem to have any issues with how much work they have to do. They only get homework if they don't finish their work in class, so they rarely ever get homework.

It's hard to actually respond to you as I would want to because you are essentially and supposedly a child. In short, no, going to school and having to do school work is not slavery. Your issue is not slavery. It's laziness.

Of course. So how do we deal with these obstructions?

They deal with it by teaching. Sadly, for some children, they just think it's too much work and believe it's slavery.

Thinking properly=Being smart in the way I was using this phrase.

One does not automatically mean the other.

Super high level thinking=Being very very smart.

I guess I should be relieved you didn't add a "duper" in there...

I admit that complaining about schools then espousing that people need to be taught how to think may cause me to appear hypocritical. However, although I am a tad hypocritical, I am not THAT hypocritical. I think that school is a good idea, implemented in a terrible way.
In order to be implemented properly, it should probably go more like this: Subjects: Debate, English, Health. Optional for those who want to invent stuff: Science. Math. This was not my first idea. I have come to this conclusion based upon a series of arguments for these subjects.

Those who want to invent stuff?

Not because it's important to know how to count, do mathematics, understand the world around them (eg, science, physics, chemistry).. Can I ask, what do you wish to be when you grow up?

I also think that school should not be a part of the meritocracy, because the fact that people will not hire people for something that they are rubbish at in most cases, and will fire them if they do this accidentally as soon as they find out, creates a natural and perfectly sufficient meritocracy which the schooling system doesn't even change much and might even worsen by excluding people who didn't get enough credits by preventing said people from getting any of the jobs they would have been really good at.

To take your example about not getting enough credits and being prevented from "getting any jobs they would have been really good at" (sigh).. If someone does not put in the effort or simply is incapable of earning grades or "credits" for whatever reason, do you think they should be awarded whatever position they want based on the mere belief they may be really good at it? Let's say you believe you'd make a great doctor. You can't get more than a C in any of the science subjects, same for mathematics. You fail to understand or comprehend science, biology, chemistry.. Let's just say you don't really bother with those subjects because you think it's for people who want to "invent stuff". But you think you'd be a good doctor. Do you think they should just allow you to study medicine?

 

[Michael 345]

What do you propose the evolutionary point in not being straight is?

Since evolution does not have a point such a style of question is meaningless

Parents "force" their kids to be vaccinated from 2 months of age onwards. Do you consider us "scum"

I can recall being vaccinated against smallpox at about age 2/3 (1944/5)

Even now I could take you to the area (don't think the tiny doctors room exist now)

At the time of course no idea what happening. Certainly I was not forced, I was being taken care of

Thanks mum

What's a "straight" person?

A person who is sexually attracted to, or inclined to be sexually attracted to people of the opposite gender, without being attracted to those of the same gender, and without being inclined to be

And while language is fluid and interpretive straight is no longer useful in the manner you described

Even yourself ummed and ahed (sexually attracted to, or inclined to be sexually attracted to) in your answer

Enough I need coffee

 

[Michael 345]

What do you propose the evolutionary point in not being straight is?

Since evolution does not have a point such a style of question is meaningless

Parents "force" their kids to be vaccinated from 2 months of age onwards. Do you consider us "scum"

I can recall being vaccinated against smallpox at about age 2/3 (1944/5)

Even now I could take you to the area (don't think the tiny doctors room exist now)

At the time of course no idea what happening. Certainly I was not forced, I was being taken care of

Thanks mum

What's a "straight" person?

A person who is sexually attracted to, or inclined to be sexually attracted to people of the opposite gender, without being attracted to those of the same gender, and without being inclined to be

And while language is fluid and interpretive straight is no longer useful in the manner you described

Even yourself ummed and ahed (sexually attracted to, or inclined to be sexually attracted to) in your answer

Isn't it like that?

Seriously? Let's discuss your sheltered life if you really are (under the impression that people could just get their own boats or private helicopters or planes to travel, if they had enough money.)

Enough I need coffee

 

[Bells]

I don't think it is. What made you think that I thought that it was?

Because you said it:

This is because the circumstances seem to be leading to a dictatorship. That is my only reason for not trusting this vaccine.

This you?

The other points sound very dictatorial though, especially the bit about travel.

Every country closed their border.

Because it's a world wide pandemic that has killed millions. Countries with a high vaccination rate are slowly re-opening. Now many are closing again because of this new strain. This is what happens during pandemics. If there's an outbreak of a deadly virus in a country, other countries close their borders to that country. Happens all the time.

I was under the impression that people could just get their own boats or private helicopters or planes to travel, if they had enough money. Isn't it like that?

No.

Do you know what a visa is? What reciprocal travel arrangements are? How about the notion of borders and how they operate?

Do you understand having to lodge flight paths, for example? That you actually need permission to take off in your plane or helicopter? That if you're leaving a country, that you need clearance to leave? They need to make sure you aren't smuggling wildlife, plants or drugs, as some examples. That you haven't committed a crime and are skipping to avoid incarceration or a fine. That you don't have money's owing or skipping out on paying something that is due or overdue (eg loans, defaulting on loans or bills, child support payments, etc).

What did you learn in school again?

I would say that people should be able to leave their countries without any kind of external clearance, but that this should not apply to entering countries.

When you leave a country, where do you think you go?

Unless you're in international waters, you will normally be entering another country. And yes, you need permission to enter.

 

[RainbowSingularity]

I know what it means. I just wanted you to explain why you think being heterosexual is "straight" as opposed to someone who is LGBTQI, for example. It's actually quite an offensive term because it implies that not being "straight" is somehow crooked or wrong, for lack of a better term.

the term "straight" is quite offensive in my opinion
i tend to ignore its use & the person using the term because of what it says about the persons grasp of definitions(as well as language, & language tells a lot about a persons intellectual personality.

it is like saying they are not unique & everyone who is "normal" & "acceptable" is 'of' the pre defined 'group' which is not liberalism

people have a lot of issues

"bias"
what is bias ?

i believe that sexual orientation is a spectrum

many people do not
many people believe sexual orientation is hard wired & should be forced to be obedient to a pre defined binary construct of heterosexuality
= cult

 

[gmilam]

1: That might be true to a very small extent, but babies learn to speak before they go to school without being taught it so...

Are you really this ignorant or are you a troll?

 

[gmilam]

The other points sound very dictatorial though, especially the bit about travel. I was under the impression that people could just get their own boats or private helicopters or planes to travel, if they had enough money. Isn't it like that?

Seriously? Troll.

 

[gmilam]

I don't think it is. What made you think that I thought that it was?

Gaslight much? Welcome to ignore.

 

[billvon]

I would say that people should be able to leave their countries without any kind of external clearance, but that this should not apply to entering countries.

That's what we have now. You can leave the US whenever you want. To enter any other country, or to re-enter the US, you need a passport. That's why airlines/ships/trains that cross borders often require you to have a passport before traveling internationally. Because while you can leave legally, you can't enter the next country legally, and you can't return to your own county - which means you have now become the airline's problem.

Then again, this might end up with some of them becoming country less. There would probably need to be some way to prevent that.

See above.

 

[sculptor]

I am planning on making people morally better through ...

Do you not think that that might be just a tad too hubristic?