ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Coronavirus

Reply
Old 6th April 2020, 12:01 PM   #121
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
If you steal a candy bar from a convenience store, you are responsible for being stabbed in the street days later?
What you described is NOT an inherent risk associated with the crime/action. My post made this qualification.

However, since it is POSSIBLE to consider the very act of being alive on this planet puts you at risk of being hit by an asteroid, and to avoid any such absurd connotations, I will amend my statement to read, "IF they know the inherent reasonable risk"
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 12:24 PM   #122
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,623
Originally Posted by MBDK View Post
What you described is NOT an inherent risk associated with the crime/action. My post made this qualification.

However, since it is POSSIBLE to consider the very act of being alive on this planet puts you at risk of being hit by an asteroid, and to avoid any such absurd connotations, I will amend my statement to read, "IF they know the inherent reasonable risk"
Being sent into a quarantined area with an extremely high number of Covid-19 cases is not an inherent risk associated with entering the US, even illegally. Especially not when one is a child who was brought into the US.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 03:23 PM   #123
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 26,104
Originally Posted by MBDK View Post
Not an ethical counterpoint. By your logic, if illegal immigrants are justified, so is becoming rich and famous by illegal means.
You are taking my statement out of context. I am disputing the simplistic response of some that the people now entering illegally are simply not taking the trouble to do it legally.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 03:47 PM   #124
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Being sent into a quarantined area with an extremely high number of Covid-19 cases is not an inherent risk associated with entering the US, even illegally. Especially not when one is a child who was brought into the US.
I agree. However, if you read my deconstruction of AOC's facebook post, it doesn't add up, and makes the entire premise questionable. Jumping to the conclusions, people such as you have done, since there has been no collaborating evidence so far, is NOT the way any skeptic should behave. You could very well turn out to be correct, but as of today, the evidence is purely speculative.

Last edited by MBDK; 6th April 2020 at 03:52 PM.
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 03:51 PM   #125
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
You are taking my statement out of context. I am disputing the simplistic response of some that the people now entering illegally are simply not taking the trouble to do it legally.
How is it out-of-context? YOU made the analogy. I pointed out the only way for it to work, would be via unethical means. Do you retract that analogy? The same thing about not taking the trouble to do things legally can be applied to doctors, lawyers, builders, police, school admissions, etc. Apparently YOU have deemed yourself judge and jury as to what legalities must be enforced.
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 04:35 PM   #126
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,623
Originally Posted by MBDK View Post
I agree. However, if you read my deconstruction of AOC's facebook post, it doesn't add up, and makes the entire premise questionable. Jumping to the conclusions, people such as you have done, since there has been no collaborating evidence so far, is NOT the way any skeptic should behave. You could very well turn out to be correct, but as of today, the evidence is purely speculative.
Hmmm, aside from whatever conclusions you are assuming I have jumped to (and the delicious irony such a claim pours over the thread), I will say that your "deconstruction" was not very convincing. It really read more like a post hoc rationalization as to why you think children of immigrants should be responsible for being flown in against their will to a quarantined hot spot of an extremely contagious viral outbreak. Too much bitters, needs more savory fact checking.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 05:28 PM   #127
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 26,104
Originally Posted by MBDK View Post
How is it out-of-context? YOU made the analogy. I pointed out the only way for it to work, would be via unethical means. Do you retract that analogy? The same thing about not taking the trouble to do things legally can be applied to doctors, lawyers, builders, police, school admissions, etc. Apparently YOU have deemed yourself judge and jury as to what legalities must be enforced.
The analogy was not to what is legally acceptable or right. It was about the ridiculous notion that the difference has to do with "taking the trouble." Illegal immigrants are illegally in the country, and sympathy notwithstanding, are subject to being deported. But they are here for reasons other than failing to take the trouble to accomplish something they realistically could never accomplish. And in the mean time, remember that the issue here is not whether we should deport illegal immigrants, but whether we should put their children in additional danger of disease and death.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 05:45 PM   #128
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
It really read more like a post hoc rationalization as to why you think children of immigrants should be responsible for being flown in against their will to a quarantined hot spot of an extremely contagious viral outbreak.
How did you come to THAT erroneous conclusion? If you look at my LAST reply to you, where you talked about that EXACT scenario not being an inherent risk, I wrote, "I agree".
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Too much bitters, needs more savory fact checking.
YES! To make a point either way.

I investigated, to the best of my ability, and only found inconsistencies in the video, and NO corroboration of any kind from any other source. Based on the available evidence, I cannot make an informed declaration regarding the video one way or another, and unless someone has evidence that to this point has not been revealed, neither can you, or anyone, in this thread. If you consider yourself an honest skeptic, there is no other unprejudiced conclusion.
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 05:56 PM   #129
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
The analogy was not to what is legally acceptable or right. It was about the ridiculous notion that the difference has to do with "taking the trouble."
Actually, a ridiculous notion is thinking if you want ANYTHING, that isn't given to you, bad enough in this life, you DON'T have to "take the trouble" to put in the time, effort, and sacrifice. Anything else uses unethical means and denigrates the people who have done the right thing.
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
But they are here for reasons other than failing to take the trouble to accomplish something they realistically could never accomplish.
Then please inform us of what those reasons are and why they cannot accomplish their goal(s) legally.
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
And in the mean time, remember that the issue here is not whether we should deport illegal immigrants, but whether we should put their children in additional danger of disease and death.
I agree with the notion that we should NOT put them in additional danger, but as noted in my previous posts, there is scant evidence to indicate that is what is actually happening. If you have something to bolster your conjecture, please share it.
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 08:35 PM   #130
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 26,104
Originally Posted by MBDK View Post
Actually, a ridiculous notion is thinking if you want ANYTHING, that isn't given to you, bad enough in this life, you DON'T have to "take the trouble" to put in the time, effort, and sacrifice. Anything else uses unethical means and denigrates the people who have done the right thing.

Then please inform us of what those reasons are and why they cannot accomplish their goal(s) legally.

I agree with the notion that we should NOT put them in additional danger, but as noted in my previous posts, there is scant evidence to indicate that is what is actually happening. If you have something to bolster your conjecture, please share it.
I think you're missing the point if you really think that taking the trouble is the only operative difference. I am not saying that this means a person should steal or cheat. There are some things a person cannot have no matter how much trouble is taken. Tough luck. So be it. But don't pretend that anyone can do anything with enough effort. And in the case of immigration, many of the people who are illegally immigrating are almost certain not to have the qualifications, time, connections, and skills to qualify legally. This is not to say that they should opt to enter illegally. It is simply to say that their inability to gain legal entry is not a matter of taking trouble. I think that's true especially now, as efforts are being made by the administration to reduce the number of legal immigrants, and to change policies regarding asylum. Even if you agree with those policies you cannot also say they don't exist.

The question of whether or not people should enter illegally is one thing. The question of why is another. I believe it's possible to address the two things separately.

As for the last point, this thread started out about AOC confronting ICE agents who were shipping kids into detention in New York. Is this not the event that is being discussed? You can believe AOC was wrong to make a fuss, and you can believe ICE behaved well and did everything properly, but that does not require that you believe the thing never happened at all.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)

Last edited by bruto; 6th April 2020 at 08:36 PM.
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2020, 10:00 PM   #131
MBDK
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
The question of whether or not people should enter illegally is one thing. The question of why is another. I believe it's possible to address the two things separately.
Agreed.
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
As for the last point, this thread started out about AOC confronting ICE agents who were shipping kids into detention in New York.
Allegedly. Nothing on the facebook post actually confirmed that.
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
You can believe AOC was wrong to make a fuss, and you can believe ICE behaved well and did everything properly, but that does not require that you believe the thing never happened at all.
True. However, BECAUSE I do believe if this was happening, that it was wrong, it is a matter of some concern, and an allegation not to be taken lightly. The facts, as presented in the FB post, are as fishy as the Jussie Smollett story. I already pointed out the timeline discrepancies, and there was nothing in the video that confirmed the suspicions raised by AOC. Here is what the video did NOT show, that any competent investigator would have included.
1. The person was never identified on camera as actually being an ICE employee. He appeared to flash a badge inside his coat, but there is no way to tell what type it is, or agent's ID number, if he was ICE.
2. No footage of the actual children was shown. Privacy concerns, if any, could be resolved with pixelations.
3. He was going to give her a contact number, but that was not shown, either, so we cannot verify this was an ICE operation by association.
4. Nothing else was recorded that confirmed any other details consistent with the story-line.

Finally, with all the concern from a congresswoman, where was the actual media, and why are there no news reports of this event other than her post (at least as far as I could find)? ICE does have a media contact point. From their website - "For media inquiries about ICE activities, operations, or policies, contact the ICE Office of Public Affairs (OPA) at (202) 732-4646".

As such, the narrative for what is actually happening is seriously lacking support, and actually contains elements of a set-up. Again, without more information one way or another, no honest unprejudiced conclusion can be drawn.
MBDK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:48 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.