Coronavirus

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

My son is in Australia (Canberra). The population is very largely unvaccinated because their government has (wrongly imo) disengaged from the AZ vaccine because they say risk of death from the vaccine is higher than from Covid. They're back-tracking on their AZ production facility.

So, the population must wait another year for Pfizer to come through. My son has been vaccinated with AZ through the British High Commission.

Lest you think that Australia is brisk and efficient, the current Delta wave got through the sort of loophole you might have expected the risk assessors to have caught. Like who touches the airline crew's baggage on the way to quarantine?

The Australian PM must have read my post.

https://www.theguardian.com/australi...tralian-adults

Under-40s will finally be allowed to get the AstraZeneca vaccine if they want it, while aged care workers will have to get at least one vaccine dose by mid-September, as Australia moves to “war game” its bungled vaccine program.

With adequate supplies of mRNA vaccines not due until the end of the year and less than 5% of the population fully vaccinated, Morrison announced under-40s could now request AstraZeneca from their GP, with the commonwealth agreeing to indemnify doctors who administer the vaccine.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The Australian PM must have read my post.
https://www.theguardian.com/australi...tralian-adults

There's alwas some forum smart Alec and this time it's me. The Guardian article was posted half an hour before your post. (12.29 v 13.09)

[Sephiroth]

Impressive!

[papa smurf]

Chris Whitty out partying with a couple of mates

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14...-latest-cmo-vn

[jfman]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Chris Whitty out partying with a couple of mates

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14...-latest-cmo-vn

Indeed, but this is inevitable when you talk about public health using wartime rhetoric around “freedom” and feed the conspiracy theorists.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Chris Whitty out partying with a couple of mates

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14...-latest-cmo-vn

Those two thugs who attacked the poor professor need locking up in the Tower of London. They can be freed when linear broadcasting ends.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

Chris Whitty out partying with a couple of mates

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/14...-latest-cmo-vn

Being assaulted more like. Increasingly common in our deteriorating society , whether its people out election campaigning or just going about their jobs like the emergency services.

I'm afraid it all went downhill about a years ago for some reason.. There's an increasing amount of thick, racist, violent people about who see any issue as an excuse these days for a 'bit of fun'.

We need to stand back and look at what we've become and where it's going.

Bad parenting and lack of proper discipline, is the common denominator here. I hope you weren’t suggesting or hinting that “leaving the EU”, was the problem, be it as you have flogged that scapegoat to death.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mick

Bad parenting and lack of proper discipline, is the common denominator here. I hope you weren’t suggesting or hinting that “leaving the EU”, was the problem, be it as you have flogged that scapegoat to death.

Leaving the EU isn’t in and of itself a problem, the polarisation of the population is. That said, there’s an argument very reasonable to make, that part of that problem is the second referendum brigade selling voters a pup for a number of years.

[Carth]

Being either IN or OUT of the EU was, and never will be, the problem.

The problem is the liberal civil rights 'crowd' that insist in their belief that people who do wrong (aah bless them) shouldn't face any punishment that may hurt their feelings

Back on topic, please.

[tweetiepooh]

As a nation or society becomes more secular it loses any logical imperative to behave morally. (This is not to say that secular people aren't moral, or that "religious" people do behave morally).

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

As a nation or society becomes more secular it loses any logical imperative to behave morally. (This is not to say that secular people aren't moral, or that "religious" people do behave morally).

I dispute that. Indeed, you demolish the first sentence with your second sentence.

Morality (but that might need definition) is certainly instilled through normal education. The Ten Commandments are widely taught and adhered to save for the usual two. Yet the population has largely turned secular.

It's some drunk guys who wanted a selfie with the guy off TV. It's stupid of them to accost someone like that, and intimidating, but I don't think they intended to hurt him. At one point you can ever hear them say 'Please, Sir' in the hope of a picture with him. It drunken, loutish, behaviour but let's not read that much into it other than Chris Witty probably does need some Government provided protection because had these been anti-vaxxers it could have been worse.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

As a nation or society becomes more secular it loses any logical imperative to behave morally. (This is not to say that secular people aren't moral, or that "religious" people do behave morally).

As a summary of the way ethical systems are developed and chosen, this is severely lacking (and I say that as a minister and big fan of morality as derived from Christian scripture and tradition). The basis of your argument appears to be that there is a singular morality identified with deity (in your view, I suspect, the God of the Bible) *and* that it is possible for “religious” people (Christians, in this context) to access, understand, and act in accordance with that morality.

In truth it is a heck of a lot more complex than that. Getting at what God considers “moral” is difficult enough. Understanding how to apply that in the world is quite something else. Ethicists and philosophers, even Christian ones, have struggled with, and disagreed over this for centuries.

I agree that any moral system requires an anchor point, or a set of reasons *why* people should act in accordance with it. For most cultures, in most of history, some concept or other of deity usually provides that. In secularised Western Europe, vestigial attachment to those same ideas usually still lies behind it even though secularists prefer to deny this and construct alternative justifications for their moral systems. But it is still incorrect to equate secularism with lack of morality. It is possible to construct a basic, consequentialist ethical system without reference to any deity at all (not that I’d recommend doing so).