Relaxation of Restrictions, Part XI *Read OP For Mod Warnings*

chimpsoup1016 wrote: »

Made plans today for an evening drinking in a beer garden in Coolock, still a month away but jaysus the anticipation is off the charts.

Last time out was a week before Christmas to watch the football, had a seriously overpriced plate of chicken wings I didn't want and was kicked out with ten minutes of the match to go. Not a great experience.

Fully vaccinated I'll be on 28 May too.

But them chicken wings made the covid stay away ! Enjoy the pints when you get out and hope fully you get the full game next time

It’s sad that I am excited to be getting my hair cut tomorrow. Especially as I normally hate it

Don't Chute! wrote: »

Yeah because some people going to mass during a pandemic is EXACTLY the same as drink driving.

If he is such believer that people should ignore restrictions and just use their common sense during a pandemic then why would he not believe that all regulations should be scrapped and let people use their common sense.
He sounds like a lad that has trouble seeing the wood for the trees.

paddyisreal wrote: »

Really drink driving compared to a priest using common sense in the last few months to allow people to live... Then again you and a few others do compare anyone with a contrary view as a trump supporter. Must be taking the piss !

I would be of the opinion that a priest that comes out with a statement that people should ignore regulation and just use their common sense doesn`t have a lot of common sense himself.
If people are posting along the same lines as Trump that there would be less positive tests if there was less testing, it`s nothing to do with them having a contrary opinion, but you would wonder who is taking the piss.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

He's spot on with that one. There's definitely a cohort who fit this description - from telling tales on their neighbours to grandstanding about how compliant they are.

Good ole Irish begrudgery - either trying to keep up the Joneses, or bothering about what they're getting/getting away with.

Odd. And yet not long ago in this thread we were being told that it was the 'toxic" influence of the Catholic Church which made for a complient population with regard to Covid restrictions. And now members of the same are being applauded for not being compliant.

Its nearly like history is being rewritten to suit a narrative or something.

A Lamb Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Her???

I need to change this fcuking profile pic

Its the facial lady-tache! Easy mistake to make tbf :pac:

gozunda wrote: »

Odd. And yet not long ago in this thread we were being told that it was the 'toxic" influence of the Catholic Church which made for a complient population with regard to Covid restrictions. And now members of the same are being applauded for not being compliant.

Its nearly like history is being rewritten to suit a narrative or something.

You obviously didn't read the article, the priest was acting alone and didn't get approval from the Catholic church so all you said above is bull and void

A Lamb Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Her???

I need to change this fcuking profile pic

Sorry, not entirely sure why i pegged you as female!

gozunda wrote: »

Odd. And yet not long ago in this thread we were being told that it was the 'toxic" influence of the Catholic Church which made for a complient population with regard to Covid restrictions. And now members of the same are being applauded for not being compliant.

Its nearly like history is being rewritten to suit a narrative or something.

See there you go again, conflating a single priest speaking out as representative of the whole of the Catholic Church past and present.

It might suit YOUR narrative to try and pidgeonhole every comment or statement you disagree with into a "side" so it makes sense to you and you can dismiss it easily, but the reality is that most arguments and indeed people have multiple different sides to them.

As I've said before, it's entirely possible to agree with someone on one thing, but completely disagree with them on another, or if you prefer, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. That's why the messenger isn't so important as the actual content of their message.
I may agree with this priest on this particular issue, but it doesn't follow that I automatically agree with everything else that he or his Church say/have said or do/have done - see how that works?

This isn't Twitter. Things in the real world can't be broken down into 160 character arguments, and there is no simplistic "us vs them/you're with us or against us" solution.

It's deeply worrying though that this is the new level that passes for debate of serious and far-reaching issues though, and it's not restricted to social media.
Politicians like Leo, McEntee, Harris and Donnelly are equally showing themselves to be led by simplistic arguments on Twitter, and making decisions based on what they think will get them the most "likes" and approval, not what is the correct but perhaps harder decision.

Social media definitely has its uses and value as a means of communication and information, but it is certainly not something that people or indeed Governments should be relying on to make informed judgements and decisions.

gozunda wrote: »

Iol but I did. Afaik the priest is a part of the RC church. The same who were being derided for creating a complient population. May I ask did you interview his boss - that you unequivocally know he didn't get a nod with regard to restrictions?

But more importantly since when has the concept of generalities such as the often repeated idea of a subservient and complient population suddenly be deemed unacceptable? Or is it only critics who may employ such devices?

But yup as you said "bull and void" ...

Well you obviously didn't read the article properly ......

Asked if he had informed his bishop, Bishop of Galway, Brendan Kelly, of the Sunday masses, Fr Cummins replied: “Someone else told him.”

Allinall wrote: »

Jaysus. people are now depressed at things opening up again.

We're doomed.

Not what I said. Try again.

prunudo wrote: »

Never ceases to amaze me how people can completely miss the point a poster is trying to make. Blinded by their view of how the restrictions should be handled and so quick to jump on a particular point or use of language, the point of the post goes over their head.

It's intentional.. usually a smart-assed "funny" one-liner that deliberately misrepresents what was said or flat-out ignores the substance of the point(s) being made so as to dismiss the post entirely.

It's very transparent and only exposes the inability of the other person to discuss it properly

I see the PCR testing for travel is also set to continue well after everyone is vaccinated - utter utter madness ...

Captain_Crash wrote: »

I thought that if you can show your vaccinated you don't need a PCR??

From https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/travel_and_recreation/travel_to_ireland/hotel_quarantine.html

If you have been fully vaccinated and you have the documents to prove this, you do not have to quarantine at a designated hotel. Any dependents travelling with you, including children, will also be exempted from the requirement to complete mandatory hotel quarantine. You can quarantine at home or at the place of residence stated on your passenger locator form. You still must have a negative pre-departure PCR test.

Utter joke, as usual buracreacy months behind reality, maybe after months of covid not being an issue they might remove the PCR restriction for vaccinated people - but I woudln't hold my breath.

So summer 2022 minimum for travel.