• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Cant Buy or Sell, how will they implement it?

Hobie

Senior
Joined
Aug 5, 2023
Messages
1,114
Reaction score
174
Points
63
Well we had a eye opening enforcement during the Covid19 spread. During the COVID-19 "zero-Covid" lockdowns in China , residents in cities like Wuhan, Xi'an, and Guiyang were put under severe restrictions that prevented them from buying food, medicine, and necessities, or selling goods. During the COVID-19 pandemic, China implemented a nationwide system of color-coded health apps on citizens' mobile phones to control movement and restrict any purchase or selling by the person or persons. These systems functioned as a digital "good citizen certificate" which determined whether an individual could buy goods, use transportation, or enter buildings, so it was a complete social enforcement. Here is some background..

"Wang Yu, hailed by the U.S. as an International Woman of Courage, has already been arrested, imprisoned and harassed by the Chinese Communist Party for her work as a human rights lawyer representing activists, Uyghur scholars and Falun Gong practitioners. Now, her movements within her home country have been restricted by a color-coded app on her phone that’s supposed to protect people from COVID-19.

The app and its color codes have become ubiquitous in China as the country has struggled to contain the coronavirus, pushing the public to a breaking point that resulted in protests over COVID restrictions late last month. The government announced last week that it would discontinue the national color-coded health app, but cities and provinces have their own versions, which have been more dominant. In Beijing last week, restaurants, offices, hotels and gyms were still requiring approved color codes to enter.

Drawing on telecommunications network data and PCR test results, the app is relatively simple. Everyone is assigned a QR code on their phone that switches between green, yellow and red, depending on factors such as whether they’ve been in the same spot as someone who has tested positive for COVID-19 (yellow) or if they themselves have tested positive (red). Only people with green codes can go about normal daily life."

www.latimes.com
 
Despotism
Very true, and it will be terrible to see it happen in what once was the land of the free and the brave, as it turns into a image of the church of Rome of how it rules..
des·pot·ism
[ˈdɛspətɪz(ə)m]
noun
despotism (noun)
despotisms (plural noun)
  1. the exercise of absolute power, especially in a cruel and oppressive way:
    "the ideology of enlightened despotism"

    Similar:​

    Opposite:​

    • a country or political system where the ruler holds absolute power:
      "some nations are democracies, others are despotisms"
      des·pot·ism
 
Very true, and it will be terrible to see it happen.......
The salient point is despotism is not happening now and will not be happening for a very long time. Some countries may shift suddenly from one form of government to despotism but it's not going to happen suddenly in the US and it's not going to happen suddenly globally, either. Reason is our fried. When modern futurists make irrational claims of fear mongering they should either be ignored or bluntly corrected in an unyielding manner, with hope they will recapture their God-given faculties of reason and so their nonsense doesn't mislead the less informed.
 
The salient point is despotism is not happening now and will not be happening for a very long time. Some countries may shift suddenly from one form of government to despotism but it's not going to happen suddenly in the US and it's not going to happen suddenly globally, either. Reason is our fried. When modern futurists make irrational claims of fear mongering they should either be ignored or bluntly corrected in an unyielding manner, with hope they will recapture their God-given faculties of reason and so their nonsense doesn't mislead the less informed.
Some may take issue with that statement....
 
Donald Trump will no longer be POTUS come January 20, 2029. At which time there is a very real possibility a Democrat or a Democratic Socialist will be POTUS. The change itself is proof against the argument the US is despotic.

I'm curious, do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?
Are you a member?
 
Are you a member?
Aside from the fact you already know the answer to that question because we've trading posts for years and my current profession has been mentioned numerous times in this forum; I'll tell you after the question asked in Post #6 is answered.



Do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?
 
Donald Trump will no longer be POTUS come January 20, 2029. At which time there is a very real possibility a Democrat or a Democratic Socialist will be POTUS. The change itself is proof against the argument the US is despotic.

I'm curious, do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?
Are you a member?
 
Are you a member?
This type of taunting and refusal to answer a question you have been asked, by repeating your own question that was asked and answered is against the rules. The question was simple and required only one of three answers: Yes. No. Or I don't know.
 
This type of taunting and refusal to answer a question you have been asked, by repeating your own question that was asked and answered is against the rules. The question was simple and required only one of three answers: Yes. No. Or I don't know.
It's also off topic. My membership as a journalist or lack thereof has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the thread. The ethical compliance of a "news" article used in the thread to support the op is, however, very relevant; unambiguously decidedly so.
 
This type of taunting and refusal to answer a question you have been asked, by repeating your own question that was asked and answered is against the rules. The question was simple and required only one of three answers: Yes. No. Or I don't know.
I dont understand what he is asking, is it he doesnt like the site or journalist?
 
I dont understand what he is asking, is it he doesnt like the site or journalist?
I am asking if you think that article meets ethical standards of journalism. Once that question is answered the article's relevance (ethical or unethical) relevance to the op can be discussed. Or would you rather I start posting in complete disregard to what you think? It's a simple yes or no question that could have/should have been answered in Post 7 but we're not half-adozen posts into the inquiry and still do not have an answer.


Do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?


Have you ever read the SPJ ethics code before? Do you measure any news report by that code? If not, then why not? If so, then how much of what passes for journalism do you find is ethical? How much unethical journalism is allowed to influence your/our Christian worldview? A variety of questions ensue from the answer to this one question, especially as it pertains to Post #5 and this op. You posted it. Were we all supposed to ignore it?



Do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?



.
 
I dont understand what he is asking, is it he doesnt like the site or journalist?
Motives have nothing to do with you answering the question.
Do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?
Responding to that question by asking Josheb if he was a member is avoiding answering the question which suggests that you know the answer and won't admit it.

Further avoidance by coming up with a new reason to not answer by saying you don't understand his motives is further indication that you actually read the code of ethics link provided and know that the piece didn't even resemble journalism. It was nothing but a hate piece of work, based on absolutely no facts and many outright lies. If written by a member of this forum, it wouldn't have passed muster with staff but would have been considered a post that managed to violate nearly all of the rules of this site.

That being said, keep such slanderous material to yourself---and especially if it is, as this was, irrelevant to the OP. No more needs to be said on the off-topic topic.
 
I dont understand what he is asking, is it he doesnt like the site or journalist?
Neither. Why the question is asked is not necessary for answering the question and the value of the inquiry (relevant to this op) will become apparent as the conversation ensues.


Do you think the specific IDN article used in Post #5 meets the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics?
 
Back
Top