WSU - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WSU (/thread-22394.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: WSU (/thread-22394.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: WSU - Papa John - 10-11-2021
(10-09-2021, 11:25 AM)BostonCard Wrote: Also, none other than the Pope urge People to get vaccinated. I hear he’s kind of a big deal for Catholics.
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2021-08/pope-francis-appeal-covid-19-vaccines-act-of-love.html
A number of American Catholic bishops allow wiggle room for those who want to go the religious exemption route, including Rolovich's local bishop in Spokane. Per these local authorities, the Pope and other higher ups are urging vaccination, but it is not a moral obligation.
RE: WSU - CTcard - 10-11-2021
(10-11-2021, 06:41 AM)Mick Wrote: My parish priest refused to do baptisms at Santa Clara, said that he didn't consider Jesuits to be Catholics.
That is certainly not in-line with official Catholic teaching.
It is also irrelevant to vaccines. The official Catholic stance on vaccines comes from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which considers the COVID vaccines morally acceptable. Further, the CDF noted that “the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good", which sounds to me awfully close to stating that Catholics have an obligation to be vaccinated.
However, the CDF does in the end say that one's own moral conscience is determinitive. The actual statement is hard to interpret, but seems to say that taking a COVID vaccine is not a moral imperative IF you ensure that you cannot spread the disease.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_en.html
The local Bishop is trying to echo that CDF statement, taking a position that includes backing of religious exemptions under circumstances that are not entirely clear to me, but seem to be more or less if one's conscience tells one to not take it.
https://dioceseofspokane.org/guidance-on-covid-19-vaccine-mandates
RE: WSU - Snorlax94 - 10-11-2021
(10-09-2021, 03:31 PM)JJJ Wrote: Long article:
“ “Rolo is Rolo, and he is who he is because of the person he was,” Jones said. “He was a quarterback, kind of his own guy, a leader. He’s been that way as a coach. He believes that he doesn’t need to take it and doesn’t want to take it, and he doesn’t want somebody telling him what to do. But like I said, to me, there’s just too much at stake.””
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/pac12/2021/10/09/nick-rolovich-seeking-religious-exemption-vaccine-june-jones/6050244001/
Thanks, the USA Today article is the best I've seen covering Rolovich's refusal to get vaccinated. I just saw in a NYTimes article today that of the 437 religious exemption requests so far, only 98 had been granted as of Friday. Maybe that just reflects the fact that many requests haven't been processed yet, but another possibility is that the request is far from routine and that the majority of applicants at Washington State are being rejected. Rolovich doesn't exactly strike me as a rocket scientist, so it doesn't seem like his application is going to lay new, insightful, compelling arguments.
And how can no one have mentioned yet that it's too bad this isn't a home game because the Rolovich drama is probably the greatest fodder for the Stanford Band that I can recall in an opponent EVER.
I respect legitimate religious objections, but as people have noted, there is not a religious exemption for Catholics when the head of the Catholic church has stated there is no basis for objection in the Catholic faith and that there is a moral obligation to help protect the vulnerable.
I know the deadline is after the game, but I look forward to Rolo continuing to be inundated by questions by the press every day this week, and even on game day. Coaches loved to answer questions by journalists and I am sure it is every coach's dream to be a national story for their political distraction sideshow. ;-)
RE: WSU - Papa John - 10-11-2021
My fear is that Rolovich is using, with success, this self-made controversy as an ass-backwards motivational tool for his team. Turning it into an "us against the world" argument. I watched a bit of the WSU-OSU game and, from my admittedly naive perspective, the Cougars looked so much better than the team that got stomped by USC.
I think it was Jon Wilner who pointed this out:
USC 45, WSU 14
OSU 45, USC 27
WSU 31, OSU 24
RE: WSU - BostonCard - 10-11-2021
(10-11-2021, 02:45 PM)Papa John Wrote: My fear is that Rolovich is using, with success, this self-made controversy as an ass-backwards motivational tool for his team. Turning it into an "us against the world" argument. I watched a bit of the WSU-OSU game and, from my admittedly naive perspective, the Cougars looked so much better than the team that got stomped by USC.
I think it was Jon Wilner who pointed this out:
USC 45, WSU 14
OSU 45, USC 27
WSU 31, OSU 24
Wait, you mean the transitive property doesn't work in sports? There goes my theory that because we beat USC, we should beat WSU, and therefore OSU.
BC
RE: WSU - Papa John - 10-12-2021
(10-11-2021, 03:15 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(10-11-2021, 02:45 PM)Papa John Wrote: I think it was Jon Wilner who pointed this out:
USC 45, WSU 14
OSU 45, USC 27
WSU 31, OSU 24
Wait, you mean the transitive property doesn't work in sports? There goes my theory that because we beat USC, we should beat WSU, and therefore OSU.
That's pretty funny, BC, and I can now see how you would think that's what I was trying to demonstrate. Actually, my point was this:
USC 45, WSU 14: USC--who the week before got curb-stomped by Stanford--destroyed WSU while playing with a backup true freshman QB for most of the game. Conclusion: WSU sucks
OSU 45, USC 27: USC sucks (which we already knew), and OSU is pretty good.
WSU 31, OSU 24: WSU has really improved since they were smacked down by USC.
Conclusion: I am much more concerned now about Saturday's game versus WSU than I was a couple of weeks ago.
RE: WSU - CTcard - 10-13-2021
(10-12-2021, 09:44 AM)Papa John Wrote: Conclusion: I am much more concerned now about Saturday's game versus WSU than I was a couple of weeks ago.
My conclusion: Most college football teams have a strong variation in their performance level week to week. Stanford, WSU, Oregon State, and $C all fall squarely into that category.
You should have always been concerned about Saturday's game vs WSU. Stanford is clearly capable of losing to just about anybody, and the game is the second road trip in a row - this one always difficult in logistics.
RE: WSU - Papa John - 10-13-2021
I suppose you're correct, CTCard, but WSU stunk up the joint early in the season and, from my distant perspective, seems to be improving from week to week. Can't say the same about Stanford this season.
RE: WSU - BostonCard - 10-13-2021
WSU's total offense has increased from 350 yards per game in Aug/Sept games to 400 yards/game in October. Total defense has gone down from 416 yards per game in Aug/Sept to 368 yards per game in Oct. In other words, both their offense and defense has improved.
BC