Did LDS leaders get the vaccine because of preferential treatment?

[Lem]

With those in my family I can guarantee you that Russell M. Nelson and other GA’s getting the vaccine was much more of a catalyst for them to receive the vaccine...

Wow, are you serious? Really? Aren't there ANY Mormons left who think for themselves? That's just nuts.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yeah, not a strong endorsement for those non-black and white thinkers Mormons are known to be.

- Doc

[Jersey Girl]

Yeah it's been quite the conversation. Jesus.

If you're going to address the Jesus question then just do it and stop equivocating.

[Moksha]

Wow, are you serious? Really? Aren't there ANY Mormons left who think for themselves?

Faithful Saints are branded apostates if they share their thoughts with others at Church. To be faithful, the Saints learn not to have thoughts. Anyway, the thinking has already been done.

[mentalgymnast]

With those in my family I can guarantee you that Russell M. Nelson and other GA’s getting the vaccine was much more of a catalyst for them to receive the vaccine...

Wow, are you serious? Really? Aren't there ANY Mormons left who think for themselves? That's just nuts.

They’ll make there own decisions, but it won’t hurt...it will only help...to see examples of respected individuals taking the plunge, so to speak. There is a certain amount of trepidation with some folks in and out of the church, to receive the vaccine. Role models are helpful.

Regards,
MG

[IHAQ]

Cinepro,

I’ll answer your questions if you answer mine:

1) Why did you introduce Dehlin as a rhetorical device on this forum?

It seemed an interesting contrast to see how people are judging the situation. Is it worse for Russell M. Nelson to get the vaccine, or John Dehlin? Or is it equally good or bad? If you consider it an unwanted or irrelevant inclusion in the conversation, feel free to ignore it (but since there are a limited number of vaccines, it is directly related).

You are misrepresenting the situation being asked about in the OP by suggesting John Dehlin getting the vaccine is an appropriate contrast. The OP is asking how did a significant proportion of the Apostles (100% of the Apostles >70 years old) and their wives all get the vaccine on the same day at the head of the queue, and why. An individual getting a vaccine more than a week into the programme is an entirely different thing. By all means start a different thread to discuss how and why John Dehlin got a vaccination more than a week into the program.

[cinepro]

You are misrepresenting the situation being asked about in the OP by suggesting John Dehlin getting the vaccine is an appropriate contrast. The OP is asking how did a significant proportion of the Apostles (100% of the Apostles >70 years old) and their wives all get the vaccine on the same day at the head of the queue, and why. An individual getting a vaccine more than a week into the programme is an entirely different thing. By all means start a different thread to discuss how and why John Dehlin got a vaccination more than a week into the program.

I still think it's an interesting question: which bothers you more? People in a very high risk group getting the vaccine in a way that promotes public health but offends your sense of "fairness", or a healthy, low-risk person getting the vaccine before other high-risk people do, but in a way that supports your sense of "fairness" because a somewhat arbitrary decision was made by a bureaucracy? It's a choice between science (and public health), and "fairness." I've already clearly explained that I choose public health. It's just interesting to me that others choose "fairness" with such vigor. And to be clear, I certainly don't begrudge Dehlin or anyone else from getting the vaccine. With so many vaccinees going unused at this point, I think it's great when anyone gets a shot.

I would also point out that your perception of there only being a "queue" or some other randomized methodology for vaccine distribution is entirely false (and this false perception is probably contributing to your frustration). The vaccines are being allocated based on politics, public health, statistics, logistics, and guessing. When the vaccine is made available to certain pools, there may be some degree of apparent "randomness", but even then, it is largely determined by persistence, access to technology, and then some degree of "luck"/randomness. As a healthy <50yo, my inability to get the vaccine right now isn't due to "randomness"; it's by design. Although I could go to the mass vaccination area a few miles from my house and wait in the stand bye queue where some people in my group are getting vaccinations due to no shows and under-allocation. So is the fact that I haven't been vaccinated yet due to luck, randomness, design, or my personal choice?

[cinepro]

They’ll make there own decisions, but it won’t hurt...it will only help...to see examples of respected individuals taking the plunge, so to speak. There is a certain amount of trepidation with some folks in and out of the church, to receive the vaccine. Role models are helpful.

Regards,
MG

Interestingly, there is apparently a rumor that Kamela Harris's (and other high profile) vaccinations were faked with dummy syringes. So even with these public examples, some people don't believe. But you can imagine what they would be saying if people were telling others to get vaccinated but not getting vaccinated (or even pretending to be vaccinated) themselves!

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact ... SKBN29A2K7

[Lem]

Wow, are you serious? Really? Aren't there ANY Mormons left who think for themselves?

Faithful Saints are branded apostates if they share their thoughts with others at Church. To be faithful, the Saints learn not to have thoughts. Anyway, the thinking has already been done.

amen, brother bird, amen.

[IHAQ]

You are misrepresenting the situation being asked about in the OP by suggesting John Dehlin getting the vaccine is an appropriate contrast. The OP is asking how did a significant proportion of the Apostles (100% of the Apostles >70 years old) and their wives all get the vaccine on the same day at the head of the queue, and why. An individual getting a vaccine more than a week into the programme is an entirely different thing. By all means start a different thread to discuss how and why John Dehlin got a vaccination more than a week into the program.

I still think it's an interesting question: which bothers you more? People in a very high risk group getting the vaccine in a way that promotes public health but offends your sense of "fairness", or a healthy, low-risk person getting the vaccine before other high-risk people do, but in a way that supports your sense of "fairness" because a somewhat arbitrary decision was made by a bureaucracy?

Again, you're misrepresenting it. It's not "people in a very high risk group getting the vaccine in a way that promotes public health but offends your sense of fairness" that's the issue. The issue is a very simple on about how and why a select group from one particular religion were afforded a privilege not available to others. If it's on the basis that they were religious leaders who would promote the getting of the vaccine to their congregants, then prioritising other religious leaders would be equally beneficial - but that wasn't done. Religious leadership is not one of Utah's stated key priority groups. If the Utah Health Authority hasn't afforded them the privilege (and it looks a lot like they didn't) then we're left with them taking the decision themselves. Had they taken it upon themselves to gather all religious leaders to their health facility as a cross-denominal initiative to lead the way on vaccination (with the approval of the Utah Health Authority) then that would've been the positive message you seem to be desperately trying to filter from this example of self importance by LDS Leaders. But they didn't do that.

If you are sensing any frustration on my part, it's simply my frustration with your ongoing misrepresentation of the situation we are discussing. I've articulated how you are misrepresenting it on a couple of occasions now, I won't be doing so again.