I have a friend who developed a problem by drinking every night with her husband. It became a wind-down AND couple time thing. She was advised to substitute something else they could do as a couple, so they got a meal service and started cooking together rather than drinking together. They both ended up cutting back to weekends only, but the cooking thing still gave them something to do together to relax. You are being awesome to bring this out in the open for discussion. ♥️

Respectfully, I would get a lawyer involved at this point because the wife allowed him to drive the car. If this all goes on your insurance your rates are really going to suffer.

I feel disgusted by it. I'm sad for the athletes because none of it is their fault, but no, I won't be watching.

Mine's pretty accurate too!

The thing that helps me is comparing the possible side effects from the vaccine versus the possible complications from actually having Covid. IF someone experiences cardiac arrest from the vaccine, the risk of a heart attack would have still even been greater from actually getting Covid. They often assume they would have had Covid like the majority of people without any effects, and compare that to something happening with the vaccine. But there is just no way to know that. If they got a heart attack from the vaccine, maybe they would have DIED from Covid. I remember seeing the same thing when researching another vaccine, maybe MMR? That some of the possible side effects of the vaccine were the same as complications people would sometimes get from the disease. It made me wonder if those same people getting the vaccine side effects would have been the same ones suffering complications had they actually gotten sick. Kwim, that their immune system would have had a similar reaction? Of course there is no way to know. Guillian-Barre is an example. Some get it from a vaccine, but others get it after actual infection.

This is very true. If you are the "1" in the "1 in 10,000" it doesn't make you feel any better.

I totally understand this. I would be afraid too, and I don't discount that at all. It really is hard to know sometimes what actually caused something.

Real life example I am dealing with right now: Coworker is 60 year old male, rather overweight with big-belly thing men get sometimes, with a wife who is an antivaxxer. He had his booster and one week later had a heart attack. No previous known heart issues. She told me THIS MORNING that the doctor told her it was from the booster and that he is seeing a lot of heart attacks after the booster. Sounds reliable, huh? Except that the week PRIOR to getting the booster, coworker was off work two days with "heartburn" and "feeling really off". I gave him a hard time then and said you ALWAYS need to go to the doctor for chest pain and he blew me off. When I asked the wife about that specifically, she said, yes they think that could have been the start of it. But that was BEFORE the booster. Is the wife ever going to let go of her belief that the booster caused his heart attack? Not likely. So while I don't deny that there are legitimate vaccine reactions out there, there is a reason why people are skeptical. CORRELLATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION is a truth. And with so many people getting vaccines in such a small time period, there are going to be things happening. I am not denying or discounting the things happening, but the causation is not always there or cannot always be determined.

Regarding masks, many people never understood that masks were one way of reducing (not eliminating) risk and were best used in combination with other risk reducing strategies. "Someone wore a mask all the time and still got sick, masks don't work." Now we are seeing the same reasoning about vaccinations. Showing the same lack of understanding about how vaxxes work and how risk-assessment works. Oh, funny thing I was thinking about the other day - condoms. You know how condoms *if used correctly* have a very high success rate. And yet they are so often and consistently NOT used correctly, that there are adjusted figures for "average usage". And the longer they are relied on as a sole means of birth control, the worse the figures get, because there is more time for misuse. We should see that for masks. : )

YES! Exactly this. I DO NOT believe every single thing a doctor says just bc they are a doctor. I do research - from reputable and verifiable sites! But dear Lord what is happening with these people is insane. "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." That's their mantra.

You personally don't feel that the non-mask-wearers were impacting other patrons in the way you reference. But people who are being careful about masking could and do feel otherwise. Not losing money has zero relevance. The fact that it is a public institution makes it more important not to allow patrons who are following the state rules be the ones to be run out or made to feel unsafe. Also being a public institution makes it MORE important that the institution is following the state protocols. Around here, many private business did not and will not. But as a citizen, I should at a minimum expect that public institutions are following the mandates enacted by the public institution of the state in which I live. The law has been very clear that public institutions as well as private can enforce who is allowed on their property. Cops are not enforcing mask wearing, they are enforcing the right of an entity to determine who is on its property. Public property especially is subject to the rules of the state and should not be allowed to waive those rules or decide not to enforce them. Adding one more thought: It is not YOUR property as an individual. It is the collective taypayer's property, including the masker's. The collective taxpayers elect the state representatives who decide the rules for public property.

An anti-vax family member had remdisivir and the family are convinced it *gave him* blood clots. Not the virus, but the remdisivir.

Oh, something I've been thinking about that I find ironic: In our area, law enforcement get really angry about "sanctuary cities" where immigration laws are not enforced. And yet those same law enforcement have balked at any enforcement involving mask mandates, crowd limits, etc., anything COVID related. They have also said they won't enforce certain gun restrictions. So... does law enforcement have a right to decide which laws to enforce, or not? "But that's different..." No. It's not.

Chiming in that I also assumed that by calling the police the library was requesting the police to remove the trespassers (those refusing to follow the rules or to leave). The protesters clearly came out of that feeling the police were "on their side". The police should at a minimum have informed them that according to the law, the library has a right to determine its rules (or enforce the state rules) and that if they do not want to follow the rules they are trespassing and need to leave. It *seems* that instead the police expressed their personal take on the matter rather than the facts of law. As far as if the police should have been called, if you are a business owner or manager, and people are not following the rules especially in a way that impacts other patrons, how else do you enforce those rules on your own property? If you tell a person to leave, and they won't, how else do you exercise your own rights? That person is trespassing on your property, which is against the law. I can see that if the person is not damaging property or impacting other patrons, you might choose to just let it pass until they leave. But as has been pointed out, mask-refusers impact other patrons in that situation.

THIS. That's what I felt when I started this thread in the first place, hence the title.

Librarians in St. Charles, Illinois denied service to 15 mostly homeschool parents who claimed they are unable wear masks. The group plans to file ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) complaints over it. Police came and then left after refusing to enforce the state mandate.

I came hear to see if anyone was talking about this. It's awful. This was for 8th graders.

I used the phrase "that sucks" all the time as a teenager. (Actually I still do!) I was literally stunned when someone told me it originally had a sexual meaning. It had no other meaning to me than something was bad.

Ours likely has asbestos which would be very expensive to remove. I hate it as well. Our whole house was clearly upgraded...except the popcorn ceilings.

We have massive pine and aspen where I live. Aspen is cleaner but usually $50 more a cord. I had no idea it could be so expensive elsewhere!

ONE cord does me in! You are a better woman! $150 cord for pine here.

Didn't we have a thread about this awhile back? https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2022/01/22/litter-box-rumors-furries-midland-schools-superintendent-disappointed/6621966001/

They HAD to name it Colorado? 😑 We have enough dang fires thank-you-very-much!

When I was 8 we came to Colorado on vacation. My dad remembers me saying, "Dad, I wasn't supposed to live in Texas, I was supposed to live in Colorado!" Been here 15+ years now. We live rural/small town but fairly close to Colorado Springs, up in the mountains. Being on the east side means winter weather but not "socked in" like some other places. We usually have a few days of snow, then the sun melts it off, then snow again. Get a little worried these days because it's getting so expensive here, but I honestly can't think of a scenario where I would leave. It's my home-place. My favorite smell in the whole world is when summer first comes and the sun hits the pine needles. 🥰

The child custody system can cause so much destruction. It's insane how much can just be decided by in individual judge, regardless of facts. I am SO SORRY.