Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

A faith within a Faith.


Recommended Posts

So, after a ridiculous amount of time the County I live in has given us their benevolent permission to no longer mask when we leave our homes. Every other County in our state and neighboring states dropped thier suggestios for masking.
 
The grocery store still requires masks despite the County dropping their suggestion which some see as a mandate despite a total lack of legal authority to decree such.
 
At a church event I asked if the policy at the chapel we use would follow the local health guidance as recommended by our Area Authority and by Church HQ.
 
I was told: No. We'll probably keep the mask policy in place, due to the Prophet's letter.
 
The letter was from the First Presidency recommending vaccination. The letter did not recommend exceeding local health guidance as we believe in being subjects to kings, presidents, magistrates in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law.
 
The person I was speaking with is in a leadership position.
 
He then suggested that the County will likely reinstitute their mask suggestion on Tuesday - after we as a County had less than 50 cases out of 100,000 for 7 days straight.
 
The claim apparently in the news today - that is to say - in less than 24 hours, our County now has 1,000 cases. (As to who measured that, how it was compiled, provided to the news and aired in less than 24 hours, I don't know.)
 
At a Church event earlier in the week a friend of mind was upset that our stake was not holding disciplinary council meetings with noninjected / unvaccinated members of the Church.
 
This is not science.
 
This is not a faith.
 
A Faith within a faith. This is not normal, healthy, or rational.
 
What are you all seeing and hearing in your wards?
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:
I was told: No. We'll probably keep the mask policy in place, due to the Prophet's letter.
 
The letter was from the First Presidency recommending vaccination. The letter did not recommend exceeding local health guidance as we believe in being subjects to kings, presidents, magistrates in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law.

Well, since everything is available online, there's no reason to be anything other than 100% correct here.   I think this is the latest on the church website.  Bolding minehttps://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-message-covid-19-august-2021

Quote

Dear Brothers and Sisters:

We find ourselves fighting a war against the ravages of COVID-19 and its variants, an unrelenting pandemic. We want to do all we can to limit the spread of these viruses. We know that protection from the diseases they cause can only be achieved by immunizing a very high percentage of the population.

To limit exposure to these viruses, we urge the use of face masks in public meetings whenever social distancing is not possible. To provide personal protection from such severe infections, we urge individuals to be vaccinated. Available vaccines have proven to be both safe and effective.

We can win this war if everyone will follow the wise and thoughtful recommendations of medical experts and government leaders. Please know of our sincere love and great concern for all of God’s children.

The First Presidency

Russell M. Nelson
Dallin H. Oaks
Henry B. Eyring

That's the letter.  Yes, most certainly, indeedily-doodily, they did indeed, absolutely, clearly, and transparently, and obviously, "recommend exceeding local health guidance".    It doesn't say "we urge the use of face masks where recommended by local health guidance", now does it.

So, nuclearfuels, now that you are directed to the direct link, to the church's own website, where you can see the exact text of the letter, and it shows you how incorrect your claim was, what are you going to do now?  (Ten bucks says you're gonna at least mention the article title, that adds on to the letter's message.)

 

Anyway, for the rest of your post:

7 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

What are you all seeing and hearing in your wards?

We just finished our traditional ward chili cook-off and trunk-or-treat.  Absolutely zero precautions in place.  All 3 sections of the cultural hall were full of people, 95% of us unmasked, all happily talking away at the top of our lungs for two hours in an enclosed building, which is prime superspreader behavior.   All of us happily using the same serving spoons, eating out of the same dozen-or-more crockpots, helping ourselves to cookies and deserts on plates.  We had one of our older members in attendance, and numerous folks in their 60's, none masked.

I'll tell you the award for best chili was stolen from me in a most stunning upset.  Mine was one of two entries that went home with empty crock pots.  The winning entry went home maybe 75% unconsumed.  The appalling injustice of it all!

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

We just finished our traditional ward chili cook-off and trunk-or-treat.  Absolutely zero precautions in place.  All 3 sections of the cultural hall were full of people, 95% of us unmasked, all happily talking away at the top of our lungs for two hours in an enclosed building, which is prime superspreader behavior.   All of us happily using the same serving spoons, eating out of the same dozen-or-more crockpots, helping ourselves to cookies and deserts on plates.  We had one of our older members in attendance, and numerous folks in their 60's, none masked.

So is your ward or mine following the Word of the Lord in you rnoble citation more correctly? It can't be both. 

Is mine following the letter of the law and your's the spirit of the law? 

Our trunk or treat was outside, unmasked which shocked me - more than half the ward wasn't there since that's usually how it goes, pre-quarantine, during and post quarantine 

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

So is your ward or mine following the Word of the Lord in you rnoble citation more correctly? It can't be both. 

Is mine following the letter of the law and your's the spirit of the law? 

As I put that post together, those same questions popped into my head.  And I realized I honestly don't know the answer.

I try to live my life based on the best principles I can cram into myself.  And the principle I was trying to have guide my behavior that night was "do right by my family and myself".   We're all vaccinated, and booster or no, every bit of relevant data I can find, tells me catching covid while vaccinated reduces the chances of something severe happening to pretty much zero for my family's ages and health.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I honestly don't know the answer.

Fair enough. 

In the end, we all answer for ourselves. 

We don't answer for our wards or stakes or govt's.

I've read catching covid after being vaxxed can be much worse than catching covid without being vaxxed. 

Hoping something wonderful happens to you, today and everyday. Same for the mods

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, pogi said:

Does your ward "exceed local health guidance" in regards to masks?  How so?  Does urging masks if you can't distance "exceed" local regulations?  I am confused.

Ah, pogi - still hoping wonderful things happen to you today and every day.

Less than 50 cases per 100,000 for seven days straght was the County's threshold.

After that threshold was achieved, the County's mask suggestion was lifted. 

In less than 24 hours, over 1,000 cases were claimed. I doubt even if we tried we could get that many cases manifesting, tested, confimred true positives recieved, and the media notified in less than 24 hours. 

Wearing masks when the County says masks are no longer required exceeds local health guidance.  

Also, we can social distance - Zoom for Sacrament meeting - it's been in place for +!8 months.

More importantly, is my ward or Loudmouth Mormon's ward truly obeying the First Presidency's Letter?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:
The grocery store still requires masks despite the County dropping their suggestion which some see as a mandate despite a total lack of legal authority to decree such.

The grocery store doesn’t have the authority to implement standards on its own property now?

 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Wearing masks when the County says masks are no longer required exceeds local health guidance.  

What you mean to say is that masks are no longer mandated ("no longer required") in your county, right?  That is not to say they are still not recommended and encouraged.  

I'm still trying to figure out where your ward is "exceeding local health guidance" by urging (not mandating) people to wear masks if they can't socially distance.  

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I saw that every single person age 12 and older was wearing a facemask, and I would estimate that about half the children under 12 were too. I heard not a single person even speak about this. As a rule, obedience to prophets and secular authorities isn't a struggle for sincere Saints.

Yeesh.  "If you aren't wearing a mask, you aren't a sincere Saint."   You wanna maybe back off on that obvious translation a tad?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

people can lie on the internet.

I think a lot in this specific case of anecdotes of being sicker may be just assumption that if they got rather sick after being vaccinated, that it was the vaccination that made them so ill rather than the vaccination more likely (according to studies) preventing them from being even sicker. Since no one knows how they would have felt if they had made a different choice on an individual basis, it is pure guess work trying to figure out what might have been Imo…and guesswork is usually influenced by personal biases. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
On 10/30/2021 at 5:12 PM, nuclearfuels said:

The grocery store still requires masks despite the County dropping their suggestion which some see as a mandate despite a total lack of legal authority to decree such.

With due respect, not so.  A private business can mandate whatever it wishes, regardless how ridiculous you may think such a thing: "People may shop here only while hopping on one leg ..."  I use forearm crutches: If I were to use only one leg but still use both of my crutches, I wonder if I would gain admittance. :huh: :unknw: 

;) :D 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

With due respect, not so.  A private business can mandate whatever it wishes, regardless how ridiculous you may think such a thing: "People may shop here only while hopping on one leg ..."  I use forearm crutches: If I were to use only one leg but still use both of my crutches, I wonder if I would gain admittance. :huh: :unknw: 

;) :D 

Just don’t try to be a sprinter. Norm wouldn’t like it:

 

Link to comment
20 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

'As a rule, obedience to prophets and secular authorities isn't a struggle for sincere Saints'.

How'd that work out with Moses, Israel in Egypt? Extermination order much? 

Israel and specifically Judah's determination to be ruled by thier spiritual leaders not secular governments - for about 30 centuries?

Political veiws the General Authorities do not support? 

 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...