Graham,
>There is little difference in the infectiousness of vaccinated or unvaccinated. >Vaccination may limit the severity of the disease, but it does not significantly
>limit the chances of catching it, or of transmitting it.

The above is incorrect. Vaccination not only significantly reduces the chance of catching it, but also enable the body to respond more quickly, reducing the time the person is infectious for.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Valley Guy,
>Religion itself is illogical.
Not in the case of Christianity, although it sometimes appears that way due to our limited understanding.

I would like to return to VK3AUU's 'get a brain' comment to Graham.

Surely it isn't very 'brainy' to insult the owner and coordinator of a blog you wish to continue using? Perhaps he is taking advantage of a Christian 'turning the other cheek', which would be very cynical and nasty.

Valley Guy,

I assume that your comment that religion is "illogical" is just your opinion, as you fail to back up your comment with reasons.

Is it all religions? There are vast differences between them. You owe a lot to Christianity for your way of life whether you choose to respect it or not: one of the advantages being your right to say pretty much what you wish to say in a country whose laws and mores are based on Christian principles.

Drink driving laws and seat belt mandates are different. Putting on a seat belt and not having a drink wont kill you, but vaccination might. I think the evidence in favour of covid vaccination is very strong. I had no hesitation in receiving both vaccinations and a booster, but I also accept that it is unrealistic to think that you can get 100% to vaccinate. There were anti-vaxers with polio and smallpox, but despite them herd immunity has prevailed. Preventive medicine is best done quietly as a fanfare amplifies an irrational dialogue of objection, and the behaviour of the press was shameful with its beatup of a handful of vaccination deaths, perhaps prompted by a desire to attack the PM. With omicron, the entire population may get exposed to covid, and hopefully with such an event the mandates will end.

What a stunning piece.

I can only start by quoting from Isaiah 5:20.

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

What a complete and utter rewriting of the Christian ethic of making personal sacrifices for others. In the case of the vaccine it is accepting the sacrifice of a small risk by getting vaccinated in the service of care of others in the community.

I'm sure Christ would be absolutely bewildered that those who would use his name to construct the kind of argument so contrary to one of the central tenets of the Christian faith.

If those propagating this nonsense were true Christians instead of Pharisees we would see encouragement to be vaccinated being called from every pulpit across the nation. Instead we get this.

This blaspheming is something I might expect from a hard right American version of Christianity where toxic individualism has polluted the faith to such a large degree. But to read it from an Australian 'mainstreamer' is really concerning and it needs to be called out.

This hopefully will be regarded by most for what it is - anti-Christian.

That is what I said in not so many words.
David

The author's assumption is that vaccinated people are almost as infectious as unvaccinated people, but this is correct only once vaccination wears off after 4-6 months, which is why there are boosters.

Boosters offer a significant reduction in infectiousness even with Omicron, but one cannot get a booster unless they first have their first two vaccine shots.

The logical position of organisations, including churches, would therefore be to require all staff to either be recently vaccinated in the last 4-6 months, either by a second vaccine shot, or by a booster, or by having recovered from the virus itself.

I agree that the position of the organist should be an exception, since they sit very far from the congregation - so long as their role does not require any further physical interaction with the church's staff and congregation.