Offline
Got this from another forum I’m a member at
It’s likely the same internal monologue most of us are having right now.
James
Offline
Good article .. very articulate and sensitive to others.
We go daily for a family bike ride in a park next to our town. To get to the park we have to drive through the town, potentially seen by hundreds of people. Is it insensitive to those who are sick and can't go outside? Those in hospitals? Those who dyed?
If so - is it sensitive to devoid those who can go outside of this possibility? The park is full of hikers and bikers on weekends and even on weekdays - though less so. Some of these people I know - and some of them, I know, lost their jobs. We greet each other with a smile and short talk, staying at a distance. “Why are you out there at a time like this?” Because we are human and - just may be - staying human is more important than being sensitive?
P.S. we leave in northern New Jersey, the area 2nd to New York city in number of Covid-19 cases in the US.
Offline
Far more dangerous to go grocery shopping than to paddle in a local pond. Degrees of risk I suppose.
Offline
petey wrote:
Far more dangerous to go grocery shopping than to paddle in a local pond. Degrees of risk I suppose.
I think you missed the point of the article.
Thread StarterOffline
Not missed at all Jdbonney. You did miss my point though
Will this be the ten minute argument or the one that lasts 'til the last person is standing?
PS, glass houses and all.
Offline
I thought your point was that we can balance risks.
I thought the article was about not trying to balance risks and just sucking it up for the time being.
Am I mistaken?
Thread StarterOffline
Wonderful.
Thread StarterThe main point is, if you are still planning to go for a paddle, and by no means does that mean that I am, you don't go public with it...
Offline
Far more dangerous to go grocery shopping than to paddle in a local pond. Degrees of risk I suppose.
What does that have to do with the article? The point of the article is sometimes you have to make sacrifices for the sake of others.
Last edited by MartinG (4/08/2020 11:38 am)
Offline
Far more dangerous to go grocery shopping than to paddle in a local pond. Degrees of risk I suppose.
What does that have to do with the article? The point of the article is sometimes you have to make sacrifices for the sake of others.
One person's sacrifice is not leaving their living quarters and another person's sacrifice is just a walk out their front door. Who here is going to decide what can and cannot be done? I made a simple statement of fact, not saying that I'm going paddling. If I shop for groceries once a month does that then give me the right to criticize dbonney for shopping twice? See how that works? I live in a world of colour and nuance, not a world of black and white.
Offline
Thanks. Not the point of the article. Start a new thread.
Thread StarterOffline
Exellent article. I've been thinking about going paddling a LOT myself recently, realizing that for once it would actually be possible to do so in early April, but realizing it would feel very wrong. This piece did a great job of articulating the issue and the considerations on both sides, and helped me and I believe others on this forum and elsewhere in knowing we're not alone in wresting with these concerns. Thanks for sharing!
Offline
Glad you enjoyed it. Helped me rationalize my thoughts a bit.
Thread StarterOffline
Feel free to disagree, but make your own post. This is the support post for those of us sticking to the quarantine.
Thread StarterOffline
Thanks.
noun
a strict isolation imposed to prevent the spread of disease.
Thread Starter
1