Slashdot Mirror
US Declares Public Health Emergency Over Swine Flu
mallumax sends word from the NYTimes that US government officials today declared a public health emergency over increasing cases of the swine flu first seen in Mexico. Here is additional coverage from CNN. From the Times: "American health officials [say]... that they had confirmed 20 cases of the disease in the United States and expected to see more as investigators fan out to track down the path of the outbreak. Other governments around the world stepped up their response to the incipient outbreak, racing to contain the infection amid reports of potential new cases from New Zealand to Hong Kong to Spain, raising concerns about the potential for a global pandemic. The cases in US looked to be similar to the deadly strain of swine flu that has killed more than 80 people in Mexico and infected 1,300 more." Reader "The man who walks in the woods" sends a link to accounts emailed to the BBC from readers in Mexico. While these are anecdotal, they do paint a picture of a more serious situation than government announcements have indicated so far.
We are all going to die.
zosxavius photography
but it is better to over-react than to under-react
Not always.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Good point sir.
Immigration laws exist for a reason folks!
Why do people discuss the 'flu' has if it where caused by a living organism? A virus is NOT alive.
Would you really deny entry to millions of people that both yearn for a better way of life and are escaping certain death in their country?
Hell yes! Everyone can achieve a better way of life without breaking OUR laws! And the "certain death" is more than a bit overblown - I've been to Mexico doesnt sound like you have, its not a death camp. I have a bunch of middle class, educated people, in Mexico who are just like middle class people here.
Come on, we're better than that, aren't we?
Better how?! Is this guilt that is drawn on some superiority complex? That WE are soo much better than THEM, that they cant do without OUR help? Bit arrogant isnt it? That kind of condescension breeds both Racism and Whitey Guilt which is another form of racism.
Besides, the resl solution to the immigration problem is when Mexico has a higher standard of living than the USA does. Then they will just have to go back for work.
Ummm, no one is stopping them from having a higher standard of living, hell I wouldnt even care if they had a higher standard of living than USA - BTW many of them do. What does it have to do with them breaking OUR laws and sneaking into OUR country?
I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.
So you say that "if enough people agree with it, then it doesn't matter ...". For centuries most people accepted slavery. Did that make it moral? It was a handful of "religious nut cases" starting in Britain that started in motion the end of slave trading in the west. At other times large majorities have favored imperialism, war and genocide. I suppose that made it moral. You are in favor of throwing Gays into prison I suppose. The fact is that societies have continuously redefined what is moral and what is not. My point was that if that's how morality is defined - by tribal, national or cultural consensus, then how can anyone be so certain about their own moral judgements - certain to the point where they condemn or those who do not share their views?
It's interesting that you ended up with what is also known as the "golden rule" as your principle test. It's a good rule. Someone named J. Christ is often credited as the author though he credited his "dad". Other religious nuts (aka prophets) have preached similar things. Oddly enough, these guys always seemed to belong to what at the time was a small minority.
My original post was intended to chide the author of the post I was responding to and the rest of the readers about the tendency to groupthink and to attempt preemptively discount contrary opinions by taking the stance that the author and the like-minded had a monopoly on truth and morality. When there is a disaster in the world, it isn't a given amongst mankind that we should all rush whatever assistance we can. Some cultures are a bit more fatalistic and see natural disasters differently. Some folks are more - well what I would call selfish though they would differ (inward looking?) - and others think that it's a waste of precious resources to react to disasters instead of preventing them. I don't think we should assume that holding these points of view necessarily makes someone less moral or immoral.
Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok