Did LDS leaders get the vaccine because of preferential treatment?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

I wonder if Jesus Christ would’ve pushed the old and infirm aside to get the vaccine, because, you know, messaging? If JC had made it to 70+ years old would He do it? Or would he have ensured his flock get the stick first?

It’s one thing to get in the queue, and then to post a pic along with urging your flock to get the vaccine, and it’s another to use your own hospital to secure a stock of vaccines and then hook yourself and your family up first. The leadership could still get a lot of mileage out of just urging members to queue up and get the vaccine, while literally setting the example of christian impartiality and fairness. How would the result be any different with their flock?

- Doc

[cinepro]

That's inhumane. No, let me be more specific, that's sick and shameful.

But the point is that in the effort to not be "sick and shameful", decisions (and delays) are made that cost lives.

It's not a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest (but seemingly unfair and biased) way and X number of lives the "fair and unbiased" way.

It's a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest way, and X-Y lives with the added delay of trying to be fair and unbiased.

So, what number would "Y" need to be before you decided it wasn't worth it? How many extra deaths would you be willing to accept?

[Lem]

That's inhumane. No, let me be more specific, that's sick and shameful.

But the point is that in the effort to not be "sick and shameful", decisions (and delays) are made that cost lives.

It's not a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest (but seemingly unfair and biased) way and X number of lives the "fair and unbiased" way.

It's a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest way, and X-Y lives with the added delay of trying to be fair and unbiased.

So, what number would "Y" need to be before you decided it wasn't worth it? How many extra deaths would you be willing to accept?

Yes, you've made your point several times. Saving privileged lives outweighs saving non-privileged lives.

Still shameful, still sick.

[cinepro]

I wonder if Jesus Christ would’ve pushed the old and infirm aside to get the vaccine, because, you know, messaging? If JC had made it to 70+ years old would He do it? Or would he have ensured his flock get the stick first?

It’s one thing to get in the queue, and then to post a pic along with urging your flock to get the vaccine, and it’s another to use your own hospital to secure a stock of vaccines and then hook yourself and your family up first. The leadership could still get a lot of mileage out of just urging members to queue up and get the vaccine, while literally setting the example of christian impartiality and fairness. How would the result be any different with their flock?

- Doc

Okay, here are some numbers.

It looks like Utah has a population of 3.2m, and people over the age of 75 are 6.6% of the population. So, about 212k people. (If you want to focus on the people over 85, that's 1.8% of the population).

Obviously, the first doses went to healthcare workers and front line workers. By January 19, Utah had administered about 173k doses. Now (Feb 4), they're up to 363k (with 8.7% of the population getting just the first dose so far, and 2.6% getting both doses).

At what point would you say it would be okay for a 70yo Christ (who can't heal himself) and/or LDS leaders to get vaccinated? Did we reach that point between January 19 and today, or are we still not there yet? How will we know?

[cinepro]

Yes, you've made your point several times. Saving privileged lives outweighs saving non-privileged lives.

Still shameful, still sick.

I'm not sure I understand you.

I would agree that a "privileged" life is not worth more than an "unprivileged" life.

But do you believe that a "privileged" life is worth less than an "unprivileged" life?

Because I believe that the degree of "privilege" is irrelevant when judging the worth of a life, and the effort to save a privileged life is just as valid as the effort to save an unprivileged life.

In the face of a global pandemic, the most important question is how many lives are saved.

[cinepro]

Yes, you've made your point several times. Saving privileged lives outweighs saving non-privileged lives.

Still shameful, still sick.

I'm not sure I understand you.

I would agree that a "privileged" life is not worth more than an "unprivileged" life.

But do you believe that a "privileged" life is worth less than an "unprivileged" life?

Because I believe that the degree of "privilege" is irrelevant when judging the worth of a life, and the effort to save a privileged life is just as valid as the effort to save an unprivileged life, and vice-versa.

In the face of a global pandemic, the most important question is how many lives are saved. And ending the pandemic sooner ends it sooner for everyone.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Cinepro,

I’ll answer your questions if you answer mine:

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

2) Would Jesus Christ, in your opinion, ensure others get the stick before He’d get it?

3) Given that LDS leadership could still get a lot of mileage out of just urging members to queue up and get the vaccine, while literally setting the example of christian impartiality and fairness, how would the result be any different with their flock?

- Doc

[Jersey Girl]

Cam am I allowed to answer those questions? It's okay if you'd rather I not do so.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Cam am I allowed to answer those questions? It's okay if you'd rather I not do so.

Of course, jump in.

- Doc

[honorentheos]

But the point is that in the effort to not be "sick and shameful", decisions (and delays) are made that cost lives.

It's not a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest (but seemingly unfair and biased) way and X number of lives the "fair and unbiased" way.

It's a choice between saving X number of lives the quickest way, and X-Y lives with the added delay of trying to be fair and unbiased.

So, what number would "Y" need to be before you decided it wasn't worth it? How many extra deaths would you be willing to accept?

Yes, you've made your point several times. Saving privileged lives outweighs saving non-privileged lives.

Still shameful, still sick.

Quite the opposite. The few privileged people getting the shot that encourage thousands if not hundreds of thousands of others to do so is saving lives.

Or, "grrrrr, Mormons" because New York isn't Utah, I guess.

Doesn't matter. They did it and the effects are now baked in regardless of what gets said around here. But man do people really dig in their heels and get combative when challenged. We are a crappy group of people if this is any indication.