Okay, so what is the established precedent of the last 100 years?Ernie wrote: ↑Thu May 13, 2021 2:59 pmThis thread is an example of why it is so difficult for those who take extreme positions to communicate with those who are taking a middle of the road approach. A person can say that he is not advocating for lockdowns, and the response is, "There is no established precedent of lockdowns that never end over the last 100 years."
Most of what is being done now is ineffective and does absolutely nothing to help with COVID, like relentless wiping down of surfaces. (Although personally I do like surfaces being sparkly clean, but this doesn't do anything to save lives or prevent people from getting sick.)
Most of what is proposed recently is brand-new and untested, specifically, 6 foot social distancing and requiring masks of no particular standard in some social settings. We have no idea, at all, what the actual effect of these things are. And there is no particular reason to go along with such "mandates" particularly when done in a manner that is not lawful.
My primary concern, however, remains at telling people they cannot socialise, see their families, visit with their elderly, or congregate. Human beings have a strong need to do these things and eventually will shrivel up and die without them. It is gravely concerning that it has been acceptable now, for a year, to tell people that the most dangerous thing in the world is (a) being with other humans and (b) any kind of touching. It is utterly ridiculous to tell people not to hug their families.
In the case of Anabaptists, we have held for nearly five centuries that greeting one another is a command, and there is no "social distancing" exception for that command. It is quite concerning that so many Anabaptists seem to have decided this biblical command is, indeed, optional. If the New Testament wanted to tell us not to practice it during "extended" multi-year pandemics, it would say so.
[stepping back a couple steps now]
