[teejers1]

The woman is not stupid, nor do I see a contradiction in her posts.  I don't happen to be particularly religious, but I understand that the world has people for whom attending mass is much more important to me.  And there is nothing wrong with asking for prayers if one gets sick, even allowing for some behavior that placed one at risk.

That being said, the tone of the first post isn't "look, I understand that COVID-19 is serious, but for me, mass is more important, and I trust in God's plan"; it was deliberately provocative and confrontational of anyone who would suggest that attending mass might not be the wisest idea, not just for the danger she puts herself in, but for the danger she places others.  I hope she recovers and I hope that she can develop a bit of humility towards the pandemic and respect for the virus.

More broadly, I wish that people wouldn't react towards restrictions by assuming that those imposing them or advocating for them share antipathy towards those activities or that this is some sort of "punishment" for people not behaving, and certainly that people are not reveling in other's misfortunes.  I speak for myself only, but I don't think any of us who have defended restrictions have done so out of some desire to see other's punished, or that we look at the numbers every day cackling like evil geniuses saying "goooood, my plan to impose control is fully in place".  We advocate restrictions now because we look at the numbers and see that if the current trajectory continues, more onerous restrictions will be needed.

BC

Nice post, BC.

1.  You don't think she already has?  That second tweet seemed laced with fear.

2.  We just interpreted the tone and messaging of an interim post here differently.  You may be right . . . or not, with respect to that poster's intent.  Regardless, differing interpretations happen all the time.  It's not the end of the world.

[teejers1]

The woman is not stupid, nor do I see a contradiction in her posts.  I don't happen to be particularly religious, but I understand that the world has people for whom attending mass is much more important to me.  And there is nothing wrong with asking for prayers if one gets sick, even allowing for some behavior that placed one at risk.

That being said, the tone of the first post isn't "look, I understand that COVID-19 is serious, but for me, mass is more important, and I trust in God's plan"; it was deliberately provocative and confrontational of anyone who would suggest that attending mass might not be the wisest idea, not just for the danger she puts herself in, but for the danger she places others.  I hope she recovers and I hope that she can develop a bit of humility towards the pandemic and respect for the virus.

More broadly, I wish that people wouldn't react towards restrictions by assuming that those imposing them or advocating for them share antipathy towards those activities or that this is some sort of "punishment" for people not behaving, and certainly that people are not reveling in other's misfortunes.  I speak for myself only, but I don't think any of us who have defended restrictions have done so out of some desire to see other's punished, or that we look at the numbers every day cackling like evil geniuses saying "goooood, my plan to impose control is fully in place".  We advocate restrictions now because we look at the numbers and see that if the current trajectory continues, more onerous restrictions will be needed.

BC

Nice post, BC.

1.  You don't think she already has?  That second tweet seemed laced with fear.

2.  We just interpreted the tone and messaging of an interim post here differently.  You may be right . . . or not, with respect to that poster's intent.  Regardless, differing interpretations happen all the time.  It's not the end of the world.