The_Patriot21 Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted October 31, 2014 it could be lady, that is a legitimate theory. Of course, they could be living together but being safe by not doing anything. Or, its also entirely possible, that, how do I put it nicely? both are lacking in the IQ department as well. also a legitimate theory. In any case, I still say not a real high chance of it getting around-especially since the media blasted her name to the entire nation, everyone is now likely to avoid these two like the plague. Probably for the rest of their lives to. Probably not entirely fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 i think it's fair. i think she should be ostracized by society for life. what do we know about her? from what i have read, and i can't swear to the legitimacy of the sources, she was an active "epidemic intelligence officer" for the CDC up until at least july of this year. (when did she go to sierra leone, does anyone know?) also from what i've read, during her time living in nevada, she was quite a liberal activist. now whether or not that has anything to do with her working for the CDC, who knows. and her attorney, who is part of the very liberal ACLU, was recently rubbing shoulders with obama at a white house dinner... and of course obama has spoken out against mandatory quarantine and against flight restrictions from ebola infested countries. it all just seems to be about as convoluted as that common core math, and it doesn't add up right. but it sure doesn't sound like she's lacking in IQ. by the way, what do you know about sites like freedom outpost and the daily caller? they seem to come up a lot in searches about this. are they legitimate sources? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted October 31, 2014 well, if your original theory was right she really isnt at risk, then its not fair at all. If the lower then IQ is right, well I can see it being fair at least until its determined whether she has it or not. But after that well, we all make mistakes-some worse then others-should we be forced to be the "leper" for the rest of our lives over a mistake that may or may not have led to worse consequences? what if it was you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
^j^ Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 148 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/27/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2014 (edited) Local government can enforce via the police force, part of the executive branch, curfews. Forcing people to go home and stay there at whatever time the government decrees. That happened as recently as Ferguson. Here we have a woman who saw first hand the ravages of Ebola, knows well enough that she can not say with a medical certainty that she cannot infect people at this stage, and while it is the governments fault she entered the U.S. so as to go to her home, rather than her credentials on arrival meriting mandatory quarantine for all health care workers returning from an Ebola hot zone, she's now in her home and obstinate about other people's right to not contract a lethal virus that very well could be infecting her. So, in rebuttal to the question, how far do we allow government into our lives, when the answer is they're already interlaced with all aspects of our life inextricably, the actual question might be, how do we argue a woman who could infect countless people thumb her nose at precautions that prevent that has the right to refuse? While she's demonstrating characteristics of those belonging to someone diagnosed as a sociopath and appears to be thinking if she keeps fighting this, soon 21 days will have transpired and she'll not only prove she wasn't infected at all so as to necessitate that 21 day quarantine in that time, but will then at day 22 have cause to file a civil rights lawsuit for all the harassment she suffered and without merit. Now, let's imagine this. She is infected. Virus mutate. She's not showing signs yet but meanwhile, as some health care experts have said is possible, the strain has gone bronchial and is now able to be transmitted airborne. What then? She's bicycled, she's met with people, she's filled the rooms, including her own home and the air her boyfriend breathes, with this virus. She's argued even with the police that did a bang up job keeping her in her house. As is in evidence when we see the pictures of her bicycling away. We recall the doctor who boarded a NY subway train. Countless people there. Where's he at? We remember the nurse who showing symptoms boarded two airplanes going to and coming from her mom's house in another state. Over 200 people on those flights. She thanks God she's alive now. What are the people she came into contact doing now? Body fluids include sweat, breath because it is moist when you're fevered, mucous, phlegm. Blood, feces, urine, aren't the only body fluids we're talking about as vehicles of transmission for Ebola. We recall the other nurse that boarded a cruise ship with hundreds upon hundreds of people aboard. Symptomatic at that. And the doctor, who's cameraman did have Ebola, 'voluntarily' quarantined herself, which speaks volumes against this mere nurse that refuses, and then just as voluntarily left quarantine because she had a craving in New Jersey for....SOUP! The question isn't how much government do we let in our lives. The question is how long do we tolerate potential walking weapons of viral death threaten public safety because they feel they have the right to? Edited October 31, 2014 by ^j^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 i'd never be such a contemptuous fool, so i don't really know how to answer your question LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
^j^ Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 148 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/27/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2014 I don't think any Christian would be such a fool as her. Love your neighbor as yourself. That would pretty much preclude our emulating her despicable indifferent behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Patriot21 Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 28 Topic Count: 338 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 15,710 Content Per Day: 2.45 Reputation: 8,526 Days Won: 39 Joined: 10/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/27/1985 Share Posted October 31, 2014 so, what your basically saying, is the government already has so much power we should willingly hand it over. For no good reason. I mean seriously, what threat? Yes its spreading like mad in africa, but look at the conditions over there-no sanitation, really, no good health care. So yes, its running rampant-and killing people. We come here. We have what, 2 cases that were actually contracted, here on US soil the rest were people who were overseas, and the two that were infected-were treating the doctor, as in direct contact repeatedly over long periods of time. While theres "rumors" of it being airborne, theres absolutly no evidence its anything more then a wild conspiracy. You have no cases of anyone being infected by that doctor in New York, theres not even any evidence his girlfriend was indeed infected-though the chances of her being so are pretty high. Face it, while this nurse may indeed be being indifferent and despicable-I won't argue that, but I also feel our nation, as a whole, is completly overreacting. What we need is caution-not panic, not wide spread fear, not wild rumors getting thrown out every which way scaring people into hysterics, not encouraging the government to impose martial law. In fact, I would wonder whats going on behind the scenes-the only reason I can see why the government and media are trying to freak everyone out over 6 cases of ebola in the US-is because they are trying to distract us from somewhere else. I mean, where was the freak out when we had 2000 cases of malaria in the US last year? In fact it was a 40 year high. Yet no media panic. Yet, we have a freakout over 6 people-most of which survived. Hmmmmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
^j^ Posted October 31, 2014 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 148 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 7 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/27/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted October 31, 2014 What's being proposed here by what appears to be weak authorities in Maine is caution. What is being stoked by a unconscionable health care worker is panic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 so, what your basically saying, is the government already has so much power we should willingly hand it over. For no good reason. I mean seriously, what threat? Yes its spreading like mad in africa, but look at the conditions over there-no sanitation, really, no good health care. So yes, its running rampant-and killing people. We come here. We have what, 2 cases that were actually contracted, here on US soil the rest were people who were overseas, and the two that were infected-were treating the doctor, as in direct contact repeatedly over long periods of time. While theres "rumors" of it being airborne, theres absolutly no evidence its anything more then a wild conspiracy. You have no cases of anyone being infected by that doctor in New York, theres not even any evidence his girlfriend was indeed infected-though the chances of her being so are pretty high. Face it, while this nurse may indeed be being indifferent and despicable-I won't argue that, but I also feel our nation, as a whole, is completly overreacting. What we need is caution-not panic, not wide spread fear, not wild rumors getting thrown out every which way scaring people into hysterics, not encouraging the government to impose martial law. In fact, I would wonder whats going on behind the scenes-the only reason I can see why the government and media are trying to freak everyone out over 6 cases of ebola in the US-is because they are trying to distract us from somewhere else. I mean, where was the freak out when we had 2000 cases of malaria in the US last year? In fact it was a 40 year high. Yet no media panic. Yet, we have a freakout over 6 people-most of which survived. Hmmmmmmm. No one is panicking. That is just nonsense. We are dealing with a deadly disease and we need to take any and all precautions. Yes it is has not become rampant over here, at least not yet, and we are doing our best to contain it. But our efforts to contain it are not helped by immature and selfish health workers who don't seem to comprehend the simple fact that their personal freedoms are, at times, trumped by the need to maintain public safety. The government's job is to protect its people. That it's constitutional role. If this nurse won't self-quarantine then the government should take her into custody and force and give her a forced quarantine for the sake of the public good. She is not having her rights violated or taken away from her. We need to the strictest measures we can to make sure that no one can infect anyone else if they are indeed infected. If we treat it like its a big problem NOW it won't become a big problem later. We don't wait until its a big problem to treat it like its big problem. That's just commonsense. Or is that lost on you??? That is not panic it's called being adult and being responsible and being pro-active. Do operate on cancer when it just small lesion or do you wait until it has spread to half your body before you decide that its time to really do something about it? By your standard, operating on small cancer lesion amounts to "panic." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LadyC Posted October 31, 2014 Share Posted October 31, 2014 the plot thickens. yesterday i did send in a complaint to the person in charge of complaints over licensed health workers in maine, as per the previous article i quoted in posts 44 & 45. today i got an email back. staci hickox has no such license there, nor has she applied for one. interesting turn of events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts