Covid cases, hospitalizations, death trends and other touchy subjects…

[Scott Lloyd]

6 minutes ago, Rain said:

Real question - What if instead of being mandatory they asked us to please consider it for the health of those around you - would you resume wearing a mask again? 

If it came from Church leaders through priesthood channels, yes. Again, regarding behavior at Church, the guiding principle is I take my direction from Church leaders, not from presumptuous and judgmental strangers on the Internet. 
 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[Chum]

9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You have no business, implicitly or otherwise, accusing them of ignoring direction from the First Presidency or of giving guidance that runs counter to it. 

Please don't accuse me of saying things you invented.

I stated that in as far a local leader is doing A, then B seems to be the condition.  It invites analysis of leaders' instructions as opposed to an implication - which hopes to proceed w/o analysis.

16 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And you have not answered the call for references that they are “actively rebelling against the pleas of our Church leaders.”

It was you who introduced rebellion into the conversation. I noted it was a counterproductive choice. I'd add unhelpful.

25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You are required to provide references or withdraw the accusation. 

My dead mom will vouch for me.

26 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Regardless, though, I take my direction from general and local Church leaders, not you.

I offered no direction of my own but did repeat Pres Nelson's direction. If you opted to not take it, because I repeated it, that is a thing you could do.

36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If, at any time there should be direction come down through priesthood channels to the effect that it is again mandatory to wear masks at Church, I will resume doing so. 

Pres Nelson directs to do all you can do and sets the example by wearing a mask. Perhaps you believe that isn't direction thru priesthood channels, only you can say.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Stake and ward leaders and temple presidencies in our area are scrupulously taking their direction from the First Presidency via the Area Presidency. You have no business, implicitly or otherwise, accusing them of ignoring direction from the First Presidency or of giving guidance that runs counter to it. 
 

And you have not answered the call for references that they are “actively rebelling against the pleas of our Church leaders.” You are required to provide references or withdraw the accusation. 
 

Regardless, though, I take my direction from general and local Church leaders, not you. If, at any time there should be direction come down through priesthood channels to the effect that it is again mandatory to wear masks at Church, I will resume doing so. 

You are confusing the issue by using the word "mandate".  Must we be mandated before we are willing to heed and obey the admonition of our leaders?  The church has never mandated masks.  I don't think they ever will.  They have asked us to wear them, however.  They have stated that in doing so we are being "good citizens" and fulfilling the second great commandment.  So, while masks are not mandated, the second great commandment is mandated.  No one will be turned away from church if they are not living the second great commandment, but make no mistake that it is a mandate (commandment) of the Lord.

Elder Renlund said:

Quote

 

“Today I speak to you not as a former physician. I speak to you as an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ...

...we also must keep in mind that as individuals, as families, and as a Church we will be judged by how we treat the vulnerable and disadvantaged in our societies. As the COVID-19 pandemic spreads around the world, it wreaks havoc among those who are already disadvantaged. Sadly, responses to the pandemic have been politicized and contentious. Our response need not be...

...The Savior taught that the second great commandment, after loving God, was “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (Matthew 22:39). As it relates to this pandemic...that means  wearing a mask...”

 

"As it relates to this pandemic...that means  wearing a mask...”  Can you please explain why/how this is not still in effect today?  Is this something we should heed and obey?

Of course, we are all familiar with the area presidency letter in regards to masks:

Quote

 

We are in the midst of a global pandemic unlike any the world has experienced in more than a century, Latter-day Saints are not immune.

Now we ask all Latter-day Saints in the Utah Area to be good citizens by wearing face coverings when in public

 

Again, no "mandate" but a clear admonition.  Can you please tell me when this was rescinded?  Is this something we should obey?

Updated today (8/10/21), the church published this:

Quote

 

On March 4, church leaders asked members around the world to follow the health recommendations of the World Health Organization and U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They specifically said members should follow public health agency recommendations for wearing a face mask.

Preventative Measures for Members*

• Regularly and thoroughly wash your hands with soap and water or clean them with an alcohol-based hand rub.
• Avoid close contact with people who are sick (this may include avoiding shaking hands or other customary greetings).
• Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth.
• Stay home when you are sick.
• Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw the tissue in the trash.
• Maintain at least six feet (two meters) distance between yourself and anyone who is coughing or sneezing.
• Clean and disinfect frequently touched objects and surfaces using a regular household cleaning spray or wipe.
• Follow public health agency recommendations for using a face mask.

*Based on recommendations from the World Health Organization and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Local leaders should encourage members to follow these guidelines.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/coronavirus-update#precautions

 

Again, no mandates.  But clear guidance and counsel to follow public health agency recommendations (in addition to the WHO and CDC) for using face masks. It even has guidelines for local leaders.  If you need help finding those recommendations for Salt Lake County area, I can help.  Make no mistake, masks are recommended.  It is the official position of the church that we follow those recommendations.  Is this something we should heed and obey?

I think this is sufficient to answer your CFR.

 

Edited August 10, 2021 by pogi

[pogi]

39 minutes ago, rongo said:

 This school year will track the same way. Phoenix/Tucson districts will do everything they can to "learn remotely" and keep everyone masked. Our school year will come and go with good memories and accomplishments. And next year, the drum will be beaten for "mitigation efforts" against the looming Gamma Variant. 

I think you will be in for a surprise if you are predicting similar isolation/quarantine/outbreak numbers as compared to last year.  Predicting same numbers with a virus that is as contagious as chicken pox is wishful thinking and not based on reason.  

Edited August 10, 2021 by pogi

[Scott Lloyd]

6 minutes ago, Chum said:

47 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

It was you who introduced rebellion into the conversation. I noted it was a counterproductive choice. I'd add unhelpful.

Pogi introduced rebellion into the conversation by claiming that I’m rebelling against Church leaders by ignoring their “pleas.”  When I denied the accusation and said I was following priesthood direction, you chimed in with a snarky remark about not receiving general conference.

You both were out of line. 
 

In recent days, one of the additions to the Church handbook is the directive that members should not judge one another on the basis of political choices. I’m feeling awfully judged right now. 

[Scott Lloyd]

18 minutes ago, pogi said:

You are confusing the issue by using the word "mandate".  Must we be mandated before we are willing to heed and obey the admonition of our leaders?

I’ve already acknowledged in a response post to Rain that it would not have to be a mandate for me to follow it. But as pertaining to behavior at Church it would have to come via priesthood authority, not presumptuous strangers on the internet. 
 

Your quotations predated the more recent guidance from Church leaders in our area relaxing some of the earlier restrictions. It is that guidance I am following, and I repeat, if such guidance were to change in the future, I would conform to the change. 
 

But you accused me of rebellion against Church leaders. You were wrong to do so. I’ve explained as clearly as I can why I’m not rebelling. 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Scott Lloyd

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’ve already acknowledged in a response post to Rain that it would not have to be a mandate for me to follow it. But as pertaining to behavior at Church it would have to come via priesthood authority, not presumptuous strangers in the internet. 

Are the official church sources I provided not sufficient?  That is not coming from me amigo...that is the official position/guidelines of the church published today.  That was a real quote from Elder Rasband.  That was real guidance from the area presidency.  The link is there to click on yourself.  Am I missing something here?

[Chum]

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Pogi introduced rebellion into the conversation by claiming that I’m rebelling against Church leaders by ignoring their “pleas.”  When I denied the accusation and said I was following priesthood direction, you chimed in with a snarky remark about not receiving general conference.

Fair enough about attribution and it helps clarify that it never came from me.

7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You both were out of line. 

I was never in line. Not sure about Pogi.

10 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In recent days, one of the additions to the Church handbook is the directive that members should not judge one another on the basis of political choices.

Ah well it's a good thing that analysis and judgment are entirely different things.  Your introduction of the notion of political choices - in a thread where you seem to be driven to avoid wearing masks - is an interesting correlation.

[Scott Lloyd]

Just now, pogi said:

Are the official church sources I provided not sufficient?  That is not coming from me amigo...that is the official position/guidelines of the church published today.  That was a real quote from Elder Rasband.  That was real guidance from the area presidency.  The link is there to click on yourself.  Am I missing something here?

As I just said in a post, your quotations predate more recent direction that has come in the wake of relaxation of some of the earlier restrictions. If direction from priesthood leaders changes again, I will comply, as I have done up to now. 
 

Meanwhile you are passing unrighteousness judgment in accusing me of rebellion, and you need to back off. 

[Scott Lloyd]

6 minutes ago, Chum said:

Fair enough about attribution and it helps clarify that it never came from me.

It came from you by reference in that you were following up on and supporting his accusation. 

[pogi]

38 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Pogi introduced rebellion into the conversation by claiming that I’m rebelling against Church leaders by ignoring their “pleas.”

That is not true.  I never claimed that you are personally rebelling.  One can't rebel in ignorance.  I claimed in the general sense that if we are knowingly and willfully disobeying the guidance/guidelines/policies of our priesthood leaders, then we are rebelling against them.  I think that is self evident.  I have not judged you.  

38 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In recent days, one of the additions to the Church handbook is the directive that members should not judge one another on the basis of political choices. 

I completely agree with that directive to not judge others on "political" choices.  Mask wearing is not part of any political platform that I am aware of.   Elder Rasband also stated in the same talk I linked to above:

Quote

Sadly, responses to the pandemic have been politicized... Our response need not be.

He then asked us to wear masks and stated that it fulfills the second great commandment and that we will be judged for how we respond in this pandemic.   We have been counseled that we shouldn't politicize masks...but that we should just wear them out of love. Is that something we should heed and obey?
 

Edited August 10, 2021 by pogi

[Chum]

16 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m feeling awfully judged right now. 

I think you're feeling pushback at what (my take is) an anti-mask agenda. 

You also got some pushback from just me for attibuting stuff to me I didn't say - because dood, that doesn't help.

[pogi]

20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As I just said in a post, your quotations predate more recent direction that has come in the wake of relaxation of some of the earlier restrictions. If direction from priesthood leaders changes again, I will comply, as I have done up to now. 
 

Meanwhile you are passing unrighteousness judgment in accusing me of rebellion, and you need to back off. 

CFR that the church has ever relaxed or rescinded their position on masks.

Did you see the date of my last link?  It was updated today - 8/10/21.  It is the official position and policy of the church.  

For your convenience:

Quote

 

Preventative Measures for Members*

• Regularly and thoroughly wash your hands with soap and water or clean them with an alcohol-based hand rub.
• Avoid close contact with people who are sick (this may include avoiding shaking hands or other customary greetings).
• Avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth.
• Stay home when you are sick.
• Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw the tissue in the trash.
• Maintain at least six feet (two meters) distance between yourself and anyone who is coughing or sneezing.
• Clean and disinfect frequently touched objects and surfaces using a regular household cleaning spray or wipe.
• Follow public health agency recommendations for using a face mask.

*Based on recommendations from the World Health Organization and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Local leaders should encourage members to follow these guidelines.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/coronavirus-update#precautions

 

 

[Chum]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It came from you by reference in that you were following up on and supporting his accusation.

I hadn't read any of Pogi's posts here until just a bit ago.  My first response followed reading a single post of yours.

You could call me out for posting without reading the thread but I think my posts turned out to be in harmony with the dialog.

[Raingirl]

36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Pogi introduced rebellion into the conversation by claiming that I’m rebelling against Church leaders by ignoring their “pleas.”  When I denied the accusation and said I was following priesthood direction, you chimed in with a snarky remark about not receiving general conference.

You both were out of line. 
 

In recent days, one of the additions to the Church handbook is the directive that members should not judge one another on the basis of political choices. I’m feeling awfully judged right now. 

So you are saying that your choice not to mask unless forced to is political?

This is a health issue, pure and simple. A public health issue. One in which masking is one of the necessary steps to bringing the pandemic under control. 

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

CFR that the church has ever relaxed or rescinded their position on masks.

After the CDC relaxed its directive on mask wearing, local congregations in the Salt Lake Valley, under direction from Church headquarters, began permitting members to attend services without wearing masks. Also, the Draper Temple, under direction from the Temple Department, ceased to require its workers and patrons to wear masks (I’m aware of this from personal experience). I haven’t taken any surveys, but I have no reason to think the situation is different at any other temple in the valley. 
 

I acknowledge this could change at any time, but to my knowledge, it hasn’t yet. 

[Scott Lloyd]

6 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

So you are saying that your choice not to mask unless forced to is political?

This is a health issue, pure and simple. A public health issue. One in which masking is one of the necessary steps to bringing the pandemic under control. 

I think there is good-faith disagreement about how efficacious mask-wearing is, and yes, politics does enter into the matter to some degree in determining how heavy handed or draconian government should be in enforcing it. 

[pogi]

25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

After the CDC relaxed its directive on mask wearing, local congregations in the Salt Lake Valley, under direction from Church headquarters, began permitting members to attend services without wearing masks. Also, the Draper Temple, under direction from the Temple Department, ceased to require its workers and patrons to wear masks (I’m aware of this from personal experience). I haven’t taken any surveys, but I have no reason to think the situation is different at any other temple in the valley. 
 

I acknowledge this could change at any time, but to my knowledge, it hasn’t yet. 

Sorry Scott, once again you are confusing mandate with admonitions to wear masks.  The church ALWAYS permitted members to attend local congregations without masks, even before the CDC relaxed its directive (for vaccinated people only).   Please note that the CDC has revised their recommendations for vaccinated people and the church just published an update today advising us to follow CDC guidelines.   Do you have any source that can trump this official position of the church?  

Please show me where the church ever said that masks are no more advised (not mandated).  If you can't provide a source, then we have to conclude that they are still advised, and always have been.  

Are you going to continue to pretend like the link I provided from the church, updated today, does not exist?  How do you interpret those official guidelines from the church?

Edited August 10, 2021 by pogi

[SeekingUnderstanding]

57 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m feeling awfully judged right now. 

This smells like emotional blackmail which one poster here defined as “an attempt to silence defense of the Church of Jesus Christ, its leaders, doctrines, principles, values, practices, etc. by making defenders feel guilty.”

 

 

[pogi]

17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think there is good-faith disagreement about how efficacious mask-wearing is

Is there?  Can you please show me any medical or scientific institution, organization, public health agency, or otherwise who does not recommend masks for all in high risk public areas?  Our own apostle has compared wearing them to the second great commandment.   Is there really "good-faith" in disagreeing with a consensus of science, medicine, and even our own faith?  What foundation are you standing on in good faith?  All that is left is politics, and radio personalities.  I wouldn't call that a solid good-faith foundation to stand on.  

[Chum]

15 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think there is good-faith disagreement about how efficacious mask-wearing is,

But isolated opinions from individuals isn't a good measure here.  There is broad consensus amoung the people most qualified, that mask wearing signifigantly reduces the spread of the coronavirus.

[rongo]

36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

After the CDC relaxed its directive on mask wearing, local congregations in the Salt Lake Valley, under direction from Church headquarters, began permitting members to attend services without wearing masks. Also, the Draper Temple, under direction from the Temple Department, ceased to require its workers and patrons to wear masks (I’m aware of this from personal experience). I haven’t taken any surveys, but I have no reason to think the situation is different at any other temple in the valley. 

I don't think there are any formal letters or directives instructing members that masks are optional (I think the default policy is that "vaccinated people may attend church or the temple without a mask"), but enforcement in practice is very much optional. I'm particularly struck by the temple (Gilbert and Jordan River were all mask-free, with the exception of one patron at each, and the Gilbert workers let us know that we didn't need them). I think the Brethren are trying to make the most people as happy as possible --- while not making either side completely happy (masker/vaccine people would be happy if the Church required them --- as in checking vaccine cards at the door and insisting that people wear masks; non-masker/vaccine people would be happy if the Church came out and said that both are optional). As it is, the Church encourages both masks and vaccines, but everyone knows that it is optional in practice. 

The handbook addition includes language that functions as a bone thrown to those who don't want a Covid vaccine (ultimately freedom of choice). Even the handbook tries to split the wickets on it. 

[rongo]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Updated today (8/10/21), the church published this:

Again, no mandates.  But clear guidance and counsel to follow public health agency recommendations (in addition to the WHO and CDC) for using face masks. It even has guidelines for local leaders.  If you need help finding those recommendations for Salt Lake County area, I can help.  Make no mistake, masks are recommended.  It is the official position of the church that we follow those recommendations.  Is this something we should heed and obey?

What do we make of the fact that the Church allows most of its wards (other than a few, here and there, that enforce masks because of leader roulette) to clearly do what they want, even contra these recommendations? 

Does anyone expect the Church to point out at Conference how sad they are that most members aren't following recommendations and guidance (like when Utah cast the decisive vote for the amendment ending Prohibition? President Grant was devastated and saddened)? I don't. I don't think it will be addressed at all, except in the vague terms it always has been. 

[pogi]

21 minutes ago, rongo said:

What do we make of the fact that the Church allows most of its wards (other than a few, here and there, that enforce masks because of leader roulette) to clearly do what they want, even contra these recommendations? 

Once again, people are confusing mandate with admonition.  The church has never mandated masks, and I doubt any local wards are enforcing or requiring them for attendance.

Make no mistake that the admonition exists.  The question is, should we heed and obey their repeated and consistent counsel on masks?  

If we disobey, are we rebelling?

Quote

I don't. I don't think it will be addressed at all, except in the vague terms it always has been. 

What is vague about this:

Quote

 

“Today I speak to you not as a former physician. I speak to you as an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ...

...we also must keep in mind that as individuals, as families, and as a Church we will be judged by how we treat the vulnerable and disadvantaged in our societies. As the COVID-19 pandemic spreads around the world, it wreaks havoc among those who are already disadvantaged. Sadly, responses to the pandemic have been politicized and contentious. Our response need not be...

...The Savior taught that the second great commandment, after loving God, was “thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (Matthew 22:39). As it relates to this pandemic...that means  wearing a mask...”

 

and this:

Quote

 

We are in the midst of a global pandemic unlike any the world has experienced in more than a century, Latter-day Saints are not immune.

Now we ask all Latter-day Saints in the Utah Area to be good citizens by wearing face coverings when in public

 

and this:

• Quote

  Follow public health agency recommendations for using a face mask.

  ???

[Raingirl]

53 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think there is good-faith disagreement about how efficacious mask-wearing is, and yes, politics does enter into the matter to some degree in determining how heavy handed or draconian government should be in enforcing it. 

The people who don’t want to wear a mask are the ones making it political. Again, it’s a health issue. Injecting politics or other agendas doesn’t change that fact.