COVID-19 Viruses and Vaccines

[Beer__League__Hockey]

12 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

You can tell its child abuse because the kid is crying.  No child should ever be forced to do something against their will whether it be eat vegetables, go to bed, don't play with matches/knives, or anything.  No exceptions!

I bet The Gimp didn't know it was abuse after a while, too.  Maybe he had a ball gag deficiency?  Zed was a good man.

[GG1]

7 hours ago, Jauronimo said:

**Pearl clutching intensifies.***  A cold, wet, snotty cloth *firmly* over the nose AND mouth is some excellent prose.  Looked pretty dry to me and yes, masks are typically worn over the nose and mouth.  

 

I just hope poor Mason can get over the trauma of the time he had to wear a mask, the time he was forcibly strapped into a car seat against his will, and the time his mother tried to put boots on him when he wanted to wear flippers.  I've been around kids enough to watch them have similar tantrums about just about anything at the age of 2 (I'll take your word for it).  The kid will suffer more throughout his life for having been named Mason.

 

And talk about false equivalencies.  Putting a mask on a child is tantamount to beating them, i.e., actual child abuse?? 

 

How do you even find "Science Mom" the 10 month old twitter account solely dedicated to the issue of children wearing masks?  Its time to take a break from the "won't somebody think of the children?" routine as a means to advance political opinions.  Mix it up every once and a while. At least the Wayfair/Q/PizzaGate stuff was mildly entertaining. This is drivel.  

 

Where are Mason's parents in all this?? Did they just send their kids to a daycare with a mask policy that they are vehemently opposed to and yet oblivious of and then secure video of it to share their outrage on a low traffic twitter account? If so, really great parenting.   Did they intentionally subject their kids to what they consider abuse for political capital under the guise of caring about the kids?  I am curious about the source and context of this video since I cannot find any attribution to its owner.  I sure hope some creep isn't using a video of crying Mason without any permission from the family to further their own interests. 

 

Let's put aside child abuse for a moment.

 

Show me the science behind the masking mandates for 2-yr olds.

[Foxx]

 

https://twitter.com/leslibless/status/1440578580317044742

 

While the above can not be verified at this moment, consider that 308 staged a sick-out yesterday. 

 

'Unprecedented' Bus Driver Absence In Oswego Not COVID-Related

Oswego District 308 school bus drivers call out of work, sending some students to remote learning

[Jauronimo]

1 hour ago, GG1 said:

 

Let's put aside child abuse for a moment.

 

Show me the science behind the masking mandates for 2-yr olds.

Lets stick to child abuse because the post I responded to was about masks = child abuse.

 

I'll have to check Science Mom twitter to get back to you with the hard data about masking 2 year olds.

[Jauronimo]

4 hours ago, Fansince88 said:

You dont even know?

49 remaining.

[GG1]

Just now, Jauronimo said:

Lets stick to child abuse because the post I responded to was about masks = child abuse.

 

I'll have to check Science Mom twitter to get back to you with the hard data about masking 2 year olds.

 

I can wait.

 

Back on child abuse.  Please comment on the medical science of requiring masks for asthmatic kids, and whether restricting airflow to asthmatics constitutes child abuse.

[Jauronimo]

1 hour ago, GG1 said:

 

I can wait.

 

Back on child abuse.  Please comment on the medical science of requiring masks for asthmatic kids, and whether restricting airflow to asthmatics constitutes child abuse.

You'll wait a long time.

 

Do you really think Mason was abused?  Are you really going to White Knight over a video intended to appeal to your emotions shared by "Science Mom" the less than one year old twitter account dedicated to anti-mask?

 

What do you think the reaction would be here if someone posted a video of an ICU nurse sobbing in the hallway because of Covid patients, vaccines, and mask wearing to make their point? All I ask for is some modicum of consistency. 

 

I am kinda surprised that people still have appetites for politics disguised as "Save the Children" after the insanity of the last few years followed by a thud and a whimper.

[GG1]

26 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

You'll wait a long time.

 

Do you really think Mason was abused?  Are you really going to White Knight over a video intended to appeal to your emotions shared by "Science Mom" the less than one year old twitter account dedicated to anti-mask?

 

What do you think the reaction would be here if someone posted a video of an ICU nurse sobbing in the hallway because of Covid patients, vaccines, and mask wearing to make their point? All I ask for is some modicum of consistency. 

 

I am kinda surprised that people still have appetites for politics disguised as "Save the Children" after the insanity of the last few years followed by a thud and a whimper.

 

Uhm, who's been using the politics disguised as save the children to push increasing mandates?

 

BTW, are you arguing that child abuse inflicted on the kids 30 years ago isn't really child abuse because it wasn't called child abuse 30 years ago?    

 

[Crap Throwing Clavin]

1 hour ago, GG1 said:

 

Uhm, who's been using the politics disguised as save the children to push increasing mandates?

 

 

 

"It takes a village."

 

"So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that ‘kids belong to their parents’ or ‘kids belong to their families,’ and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

[Jauronimo]

11 minutes ago, GG1 said:

 

Uhm, who's been using the politics disguised as save the children to push increasing mandates?

 

BTW, are you arguing that child abuse inflicted on the kids 30 years ago isn't really child abuse because it wasn't called child abuse 30 years ago?    

 

Save the Children really isn't a disguise if the proponents of mask mandates truly believe, correctly or incorrectly, that these increased mandates will actually save children.  Using save the children is a disguise if your intent is to smear all your opponents as adenochrome addicted pedo monsters who can only be stopped by re-electing one man.  

 

No, that was parody.  I am having a laugh at the people who unironically share boomer content about the softening of America, the coddling of American children, the Pussification of America, who wear corporal punishment experienced at the hands of parents and educators as a badge of honor but then clutch their pearls and faint at the video of a mask being put on poor Mason.

 

Its a sad day when the crowd that loudly proclaims "F@#$ your feelings!" is brought to their knees by a sketchy appeal to emotion.  Calling that video child abuse is a disservice to children actually experiencing abuse.  It reads as highly disingenuous.  

 

Its ok to admit that people who share many of the same opinions as us are just embarrassing when it comes to consistency of logic and arguments.  

[Jauronimo]

6 hours ago, BeerLeagueHockey said:

I bet The Gimp didn't know it was abuse after a while, too.  Maybe he had a ball gag deficiency?  Zed was a good man.

This you?  Sorry for your loss.

 

[Foxx]

9 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

This you?  Sorry for your loss.

 

This is not the other place. Do better.

[Jauronimo]

Just now, Foxx said:

This is not the other place. Do better.

How much better does a question of gimp related ball-gag deficiency really deserve?

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, Jauronimo said:

How much better does a question of gimp related ball-gag deficiency really deserve?

I'm sorry, was there a personal attack involved? 

 

The fact that you responded to other posts and then went out of your way to respond, via an ad-hominen attack, to a post made 6 hours ago, is a warning sign. I'll say it again, do better.

[GG1]

25 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Save the Children really isn't a disguise if the proponents of mask mandates truly believe, correctly or incorrectly, that these increased mandates will actually save children.  Using save the children is a disguise if your intent is to smear all your opponents as adenochrome addicted pedo monsters who can only be stopped by re-electing one man.  

 

No, that was parody.  I am having a laugh at the people who unironically share boomer content about the softening of America, the coddling of American children, the Pussification of America, who wear corporal punishment experienced at the hands of parents and educators as a badge of honor but then clutch their pearls and faint at the video of a mask being put on poor Mason.

 

Its a sad day when the crowd that loudly proclaims "F@#$ your feelings!" is brought to their knees by a sketchy appeal to emotion.  Calling that video child abuse is a disservice to children actually experiencing abuse.  It reads as highly disingenuous.  

 

Its ok to admit that people who share many of the same opinions as us are just embarrassing when it comes to consistency of logic and arguments.  

 

And yet you still haven't provided evidence that forced masking of a crying child is not a form of child abuse.

 

Hysterical, emotional, devoid of more context?  Sure.  But also fits the bill.  Do you agree with the flight attendant who got the 2-yr old asthmatic kid tossed from a flight?

 

Funny how you hide behind the opposite side's "feelings" in rationalizing their desire to save the children, because deep down inside they believe they are saving the children, but the same can't be afforded to the side you disagree with.  Kind of like you disappeared from the Bills tickets discussion when your talking points were blown up again.

 

[LB3]

There's been a lot of talk about the long term effects of Covid.

 

I wonder what the long term developmental and psychological effects on young children will be. They could end up well adjusted. Or they could end up different...

 

 

[Beer__League__Hockey]

21 minutes ago, LB3 said:

There's been a lot of talk about the long term effects of Covid.

 

I wonder what the long term developmental and psychological effects on young children will be. They could end up well adjusted. Or they could end up different...

 

 

 

These masked up kids just need to take baby steps as they proceed thru this post-covid landscape; they'll be handing out crisp business cards with watermarks on them before we know it.

[Jauronimo]

Just now, GG1 said:

 

And yet you still haven't provided evidence that forced masking of a crying child is not a form of child abuse.

 

Hysterical, emotional, devoid of more context?  Sure.  But also fits the bill.  Do you agree with the flight attendant who got the 2-yr old asthmatic kid tossed from a flight?

 

Funny how you hide behind the opposite side's "feelings" in rationalizing their desire to save the children, because deep down inside they believe they are saving the children, but the same can't be afforded to the side you disagree with.  Kind of like you disappeared from the Bills tickets discussion when your talking points were blown up again.

 

And you have provided evidence that it is abuse? ....How did you not see this coming?

 

Here's the definition of child abuse per ChildAbuse.org https://www.childhelp.org/child-abuse/

 

Child abuse is when someone, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm, or risk of serious harm to a child.

 

That looks like evidence enough that no abuse occurred.  Since you have declined to answer, I'm pretty sure you don't consider it abuse either but just want to fight.

 

Here we go again with goal post shifting and steering the conversation into asthmatics.

 

I will concede that people are so unhinged that they may legitimately believe that mask wearing bears an imminent risk of death to children not just limited to the ticking time-bomb asthmatic cases you keep bringing up.  I am not aware of a single documented case of this happening but I don't doubt some people earnestly believe it nonetheless.  I don't think (at least I hope) any of the participants of this thread are among those who believe that the anti-mask agenda is truly saving the lives of children.

 

I don't recall what discussion you're taking a victory lap on but I'm reasonably sure it went a lot like this one.    

 

[Fansince88]

Just now, Jauronimo said:

And you have provided evidence that it is abuse? ....How did you not see this coming?

 

Here's the definition of child abuse per ChildAbuse.org https://www.childhelp.org/child-abuse/

 

Child abuse is when someone, whether through action or failing to act, causes injury, death, emotional harm, or risk of serious harm to a child.

 

That looks like evidence enough that no abuse occurred.  Since you have declined to answer, I'm pretty sure you don't consider it abuse either but just want to fight.

 

Here we go again with goal post shifting and steering the conversation into asthmatics.

 

I will concede that people are so unhinged that they may legitimately believe that mask wearing bears an imminent risk of death to children not just limited to the ticking time-bomb asthmatic cases you keep bringing up.  I am not aware of a single documented case of this happening but I don't doubt some people earnestly believe it nonetheless.  I don't think (at least I hope) any of the participants of this thread are among those who believe that the anti-mask agenda is truly saving the lives of children.

 

I don't recall what discussion you're taking a victory lap on but I'm reasonably sure it went a lot like this one.    

 

So you are 100% sure this kid has received no emotional harm?

[Jauronimo]

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

I'm sorry, was there a personal attack involved? 

 

The fact that you responded to other posts and then went out of your way to respond, via an ad-hominen attack, to a post made 6 hours ago, is a warning sign. I'll say it again, do better.

He said Zed was a good guy.  I don't know if you saw Pulp Fiction but Zed only had one friend and it was the guy in the pic.  Asking a guy in jest if he's a fictional character does not meet the criteria for an ad-hominem attack.  I would hope a guy with a predilection for discussing sado-masochism, gimps, and ball gags to make a point would be up for a little banter. 

 

Point taken, though. Hold the banter, green light on S&M.