If you read my post carefully you will notice that I was quite specific and open about there being exceptions. The reason they are notable/news is because they are exceptions.
We should all be potentially penalized because of potentially catching a small number of criminals? You may not have any money but some of us do and, so long as we pay our taxes, this should be none of the governments business when we decide to spend it. Cf. The fourth amendment.
There, your post, is another example. I really do not think that the GP actually has even ever been in a VA hospital. The initial clue was them calling it the VA. The VA is lots of things, one of which is a hospital. The rest of the clue came when they started to make some very old claims about them. They have improved so much over the past 20 years that it is amazing. I can even order refills online, I can check my records, I can opt to share my records, etc... I was a grunt, most any health issues can be 'related' so getting care is not an issue. I could get a disability check (I think it would be fraud in my case) but I do not. I do not want it, I do not need it.
If I had to make a wild, uneducated, and completely from the hip guess about this, and I do not have to but I will anyhow because that is how it is done around here, then I would suggest the most likely host would be an animal that carries the virus without them being negatively impacted by the virus. If smallpox still exists (outside of labs) then I would guess that as the most likely place to find it.
It is funny how much hypocrisy this subject has. Many of these same people decry the singular premise of their argument. The basis, entirely, is limited to, "Think of the children." It is riddled with appeals to authority, ad hominem, strawmen, correlation and causation errors, and myriad other logical fallacies. However, no argument, however logical, will mean that a single mind was changed. Logic does not change opinions. It is okay to force medical procedures if it is one that they agree with. As much as I utilize and support vaccination I do not support draconian measures or appeals to authority as a way to force other people to conform to my beliefs.
Does 'can't' or 'refusal' actually alter the outcome? No, not your opinion, does it actually affect the outcome? Can you prove the vector is 'refusal' and not 'can't?' Do you have any evidence that shows that 'can't' is less dangerous than 'refusal?'
Keep in mind that I am pro-vaccine. I am not pro-draconian or authoritative force being used as a means to "think of the children." It may suck but shit happens. Much of that shit could have been prevented and much of it is the fault of somebody else. We will not achieve perfection even if we use draconian means to try to force our ideals onto other people. As much as I believe we should all be vaccinated I do not see how I can reasonably force someone to do so without being an authoritative ass. I would suggest greater education as well as providing adequate health care as social programs with potentially great benefits.
While I think vaccination is a wonderful thing (and would never avoid it) it seems that the argument against disallowing the choice is premised on, "Think of the children!" Your post is, well, exactly that. Forcing any physical act on another is, well, force. As much as I personally disagree with it, and I am aware of the potential ramifications, I am not comfortable forcing any medical procedure on anyone much like I am not comfortable disallowing medical procedures. I personally, for example, dislike abortion but I would never have the temerity to tell someone that they could not have one. My body, my rights. Their child, their rights - until said child reaches majority. I would probably support a law that allows unvaccinated children to punch their parents in the face, repeatedly - until tired, when they reach the age of majority.
My kids were vaccinated and I think we should all get them vaccinated and maintain our own vaccines throughout our lives but I do not think you are an authoritative source to decide such things as "no good reason." Who are we to judge what is and is not good without an absolute knowledge of the future?
Parents are not and have never been infallible. Why are you expecting perfection in a imperfect host? You seem to be advocating logic in an illogical manner. Just accept that people are going to die, some for stupid reasons, and do your best with what you have.
In addition, I suspect that the trivial number of people who choose to not get vaccinated will have little impact due to the afore mentioned herd immunity. We must first prove they are the vector and not the child who was unable to be vaccinated because the vaccine is not made without things like egg-white content.
I think they should only be held accountable after harm has been proven. Victimless crimes are bad. I also do not think we, as a society, can demand what someone does to their body. Just like we should not be outlawing abortion... Now the parent, by right of parenthood, has the right - obligation really, to do what they see fit concerning their child so long as no harm is being done. I think they should accept accountability, however, and if harm is done they should be penalized. Does this mean that we have to wait until there is a victim? Yes. As cruel as it sounds, I am okay with that.
Every day is a reason to celebrate Jesus thus no need for holidays and a line in the Bible that there will be an accounting for the blood. Yes, I did try to listen to them before outright dismissing them. It was amusing for a time. I would not have listened at all but I had answered the door naked (just out of the shower) and they waited outside patiently while I dressed so I was willing to listen for a while.
That was funny but do you realize you said you do not use the internet, while posting on the internet? I suppose that was meant to be part of the joke?
With Android, a simple checkbox enables you to install applications from a source other than Google's store. Then search for the version you want, uninstall the version you do not want, and install the version you do want. This is not complex.
Almost twice as many people died in that war than died in the cola wars - combined! Russia is still refusing to acknowledge their involvement. Oh, the humanity!
That would mean that the ex-president of the US is still considered a president. Title retention does not confer any status in either case I believe. Nomenclature would be the entire title and not the singular making it no greater than one pope and no greater than one president?
Slashdot Mirror
If you read my post carefully you will notice that I was quite specific and open about there being exceptions. The reason they are notable/news is because they are exceptions.
All you have to do is the reporting. If you don't, there is a presumption that you're laundering money.
The only presumption that should be made is innocence. That is by right. Get the fuck out of my country and stop voting.
We should all be potentially penalized because of potentially catching a small number of criminals? You may not have any money but some of us do and, so long as we pay our taxes, this should be none of the governments business when we decide to spend it. Cf. The fourth amendment.
There, your post, is another example. I really do not think that the GP actually has even ever been in a VA hospital. The initial clue was them calling it the VA. The VA is lots of things, one of which is a hospital. The rest of the clue came when they started to make some very old claims about them. They have improved so much over the past 20 years that it is amazing. I can even order refills online, I can check my records, I can opt to share my records, etc... I was a grunt, most any health issues can be 'related' so getting care is not an issue. I could get a disability check (I think it would be fraud in my case) but I do not. I do not want it, I do not need it.
I can not vouch for it being there but I have had good luck at Aptoid.
If I had to make a wild, uneducated, and completely from the hip guess about this, and I do not have to but I will anyhow because that is how it is done around here, then I would suggest the most likely host would be an animal that carries the virus without them being negatively impacted by the virus. If smallpox still exists (outside of labs) then I would guess that as the most likely place to find it.
It is funny how much hypocrisy this subject has. Many of these same people decry the singular premise of their argument. The basis, entirely, is limited to, "Think of the children." It is riddled with appeals to authority, ad hominem, strawmen, correlation and causation errors, and myriad other logical fallacies. However, no argument, however logical, will mean that a single mind was changed. Logic does not change opinions. It is okay to force medical procedures if it is one that they agree with. As much as I utilize and support vaccination I do not support draconian measures or appeals to authority as a way to force other people to conform to my beliefs.
Does 'can't' or 'refusal' actually alter the outcome? No, not your opinion, does it actually affect the outcome? Can you prove the vector is 'refusal' and not 'can't?' Do you have any evidence that shows that 'can't' is less dangerous than 'refusal?'
Keep in mind that I am pro-vaccine. I am not pro-draconian or authoritative force being used as a means to "think of the children." It may suck but shit happens. Much of that shit could have been prevented and much of it is the fault of somebody else. We will not achieve perfection even if we use draconian means to try to force our ideals onto other people. As much as I believe we should all be vaccinated I do not see how I can reasonably force someone to do so without being an authoritative ass. I would suggest greater education as well as providing adequate health care as social programs with potentially great benefits.
While I think vaccination is a wonderful thing (and would never avoid it) it seems that the argument against disallowing the choice is premised on, "Think of the children!" Your post is, well, exactly that. Forcing any physical act on another is, well, force. As much as I personally disagree with it, and I am aware of the potential ramifications, I am not comfortable forcing any medical procedure on anyone much like I am not comfortable disallowing medical procedures. I personally, for example, dislike abortion but I would never have the temerity to tell someone that they could not have one. My body, my rights. Their child, their rights - until said child reaches majority. I would probably support a law that allows unvaccinated children to punch their parents in the face, repeatedly - until tired, when they reach the age of majority.
My kids were vaccinated and I think we should all get them vaccinated and maintain our own vaccines throughout our lives but I do not think you are an authoritative source to decide such things as "no good reason." Who are we to judge what is and is not good without an absolute knowledge of the future?
Parents are not and have never been infallible. Why are you expecting perfection in a imperfect host? You seem to be advocating logic in an illogical manner. Just accept that people are going to die, some for stupid reasons, and do your best with what you have.
In addition, I suspect that the trivial number of people who choose to not get vaccinated will have little impact due to the afore mentioned herd immunity. We must first prove they are the vector and not the child who was unable to be vaccinated because the vaccine is not made without things like egg-white content.
I think they should only be held accountable after harm has been proven. Victimless crimes are bad. I also do not think we, as a society, can demand what someone does to their body. Just like we should not be outlawing abortion... Now the parent, by right of parenthood, has the right - obligation really, to do what they see fit concerning their child so long as no harm is being done. I think they should accept accountability, however, and if harm is done they should be penalized. Does this mean that we have to wait until there is a victim? Yes. As cruel as it sounds, I am okay with that.
Every day is a reason to celebrate Jesus thus no need for holidays and a line in the Bible that there will be an accounting for the blood. Yes, I did try to listen to them before outright dismissing them. It was amusing for a time. I would not have listened at all but I had answered the door naked (just out of the shower) and they waited outside patiently while I dressed so I was willing to listen for a while.
Ideally web developers will not be developing applications. This is ideal and, as such, is unlikely to be true.
That ties it in better. I was curious where you were going with that.
You did miss it. It was here.
That was funny but do you realize you said you do not use the internet, while posting on the internet? I suppose that was meant to be part of the joke?
Delete the logs, disconnect from the internet, open the application, and change the log settings?
Which has what to do with Skype?
With Android, a simple checkbox enables you to install applications from a source other than Google's store. Then search for the version you want, uninstall the version you do not want, and install the version you do want. This is not complex.
Almost twice as many people died in that war than died in the cola wars - combined! Russia is still refusing to acknowledge their involvement. Oh, the humanity!
That would mean that the ex-president of the US is still considered a president. Title retention does not confer any status in either case I believe. Nomenclature would be the entire title and not the singular making it no greater than one pope and no greater than one president?
I am sorry that it was not clear that it was meant for a humor value.
Raw numbers (assuming they are true) do not lie, they are just misunderstood by people because the people using them can not communicate clearly.