Does that mean the infected have to pay, or is it covered by your public health Insurance (is here)
Mum and Shops? Do you mean like delis or small shops of all kinds?
What used to be called ‘Delis’ or ‘Convenience stores’ Sold things like bread, milk, cigarettes, newspapers, ice cream and Cold cuts, plus a bunch of other things. Very few left here in South Australia. The gas stations have taken that business because they no longer do repairs. Very expensive.
They tend to be owned by supermarket chains. When you buy groceries of $30 or greater, you a discount voucher printed on your receipt. The discount is 4 cents a litre. We also have a petrol price cycle during the week. In my area, the price of petrol presently varies from 69 cents litre to as low as 24 cents litre.
I hate using those fucking vouchers as well as constant changes to prices. I checked, it’s not illegal, it’s just marketing strategy.
Because alcohol may not be sold in supermarkets (or delis) the major supermarkets also own the bigger liquor store chains. Usually situation close to as supermarket. They have discount wars. It’s only of academic interest to me because I stopped drinking in 2002.
Monopolies are technically illegal here, but for some strange reason, oligopolies are not. So we have 2 major chains (Plus Aldi only recently). Same with soap products; many brands, but only two major producers. The degree to which they effect the market is arguable.
I like to believe I am empathic and sensitive to others, but I feel zero sympathy for those mentioned in the video. Why? Because they have caused many to believe their BS, and many have died.
A secondary effect is that they have tied up the medical system, and those in need of attention and elective surgeries have been delayed. More suffering and death for conditions not connected to Covid.
Covid is nasty, those who die, die alone and in agony, Their families and loved ones can only look on, at best from behind a pane of glass.
I fear there may always be some residual guilt when leaving your former religion. I of all people know how easy it is for guilt to change into a demonic self-perception.
I think it’s a lot about having the ability to distance yourself from belief in the supernatural. The ability to stop yourself from thinking you’re evil, horrible for abandoning god is all about your capability and capacity to embrace rational thought.
You’re not what your religious brain thinks you are. A monster is hardly rational, and if you’re capable of rational thought, that means you are taking a big step away from being a monster.
This is just possibly simplistic verbiage on my part, but maybe it could help one person in a million.
I am so sorry. I’ve heard of that phenomenon before and I can only imagine what it feels like. The church itself has so much to answer for so it infuriates me to no end that they should indoctrinate their flock with self-imposed guilt.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses do the same thing with their members. Part of their doctrine is that if you don’t report your sins you’re actually hurting the congregation you’re in.
I think it’s kind of ironic though that a lot of Catholics do accept evolution. Part of me thinks the church is playing a game of confusion in order to control the masses or something.
Evolution is accepted by the Catholic church and is taught in catholic schools. We were also taught that the book of genesis at least is allegory and not meant to be taken literally.
The guilt I still sometimes experience is never extreme, more like a niggle.
Likely the best way to help any religious person, having issues with transition to rational life, would be Oxytocin Receptor Antagonists, Atosiban and Nolasiban…thus stopping the addiction feedback loop of religiosity encounter rewards in the noodle.
Anti-religion pills. Now THERE’S an idea! If only it were that easy.
Welcome aboard, Scruff. Good to have you with us. Bathroom is down the hall on the right. Breakroom on the left. The chair with all the hair and funny colored stains is Cog’s. Best not to sit there unless you take HAZMAT precautions.
As for helping those who are uncertain about their religion, best thing to do (in my opinion) is let them come to you. This I know from personal experience. I was born/raised in a Christian home/family/community. (Primarily Baptist and Methodist.) Always had my doubts about the bible teachings, even as a little kid. But such things were NOT questioned/challenged back in those days. The consequences were not favorable. As a result, the fear of Satan and Hell became firmly implanted in my psyche. To “question God” was a sure-fire way to win an express ticket to the eternal Lake of Fire. Therefore, as I got older, better educated, and more experienced, the thought of doing any research or questioning the bible was always taboo, regardless of how much it did not make sense to me. So, basically, I spent most all of my adult years avoiding the topic of religion as much as possible. NEVER felt comfortable if somebody approached me to discuss it, whether they were pro or con religion. It was only after meeting my wife when I finally started to break away from the chains of my indoctrination. Long story short, she was a yoga instructor (and Pagan) when we met, and she had been raised attending a private Christian school from kindergarten to high school graduation. It was our discussions about yoga and Paganism that got me curious and asking questions. And it was her extensive knowledge of the bible and her research abilities that allowed her to tell me things about Christianity I had never heard before. Little by little, I began to see religion for what it truly is, and little by little I lost that fear of Satan/hell. Took a few years, and it wasn’t always easy, but eventually I found myself creating an account here on the AR, which I found randomly with a Google search. Haven’t looked back since then, and I now thoroughly enjoy religious discussions.
All that to say I had to reach the point ON MY OWN to want to openly question my religious beliefs. Had anybody tried to convince me before that point (no matter how reasonable, logical, or rational), I would have retreated from the discussion, as whatever they said would have made me extremely uncomfortable. Granted, it is not the same for everybody. But I do understand, and can fully relate to, those who are in doubt but are too afraid to seek further answers.
Ahmen! Or whatever other phrase might signify I am in total agreement. Maybe a You Go Girl? Or Wi Wi? I’m not sure, but fuckin shit man. That’s a lot like how I got out of the brethren church and that bat shittery religious baggage. It’s just that, it’s other peoples baggage, why am I carrying this shit?
Thank you Tin, I understand and identify with your story.
I was just thinking that both VMAT2, whos expression causes irrational belief in humans, and oxytosin, which is a significant neuropeptide whose secretion plays a significant role in the human addiction feedback loop. Blocking or reducing either, may reduce the need for religiosity. I am not sure who would and how research to reduce religiosity in humans would be initiated…just a thought at this point. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/mormons-experience-religion-like-drug-takers-feel-highs-neuroscientists-say
Maybe we could engage the 99.9% of the incarcerated in our jails, who just happen to be religious(surprise), and offer the neuropetide blocker, to loose their religiosity, in exchange for time off their sentence. If the drug works, we would be killing two birds with one stone…validating the research, and also stopping their religiosity, which is their reason for their immoral/illegal actions which landed them in jail in the first place. LOL.
Another scientificly proven option is to sever the Corpus Colusa in which case the Christian could sit about and argue with itslef and leave the rest of us the fuck alone.
VMAT2, or gene SLC18A2, a vasicular monoamine transporter (2)…AKA the god gene, which helps modulation of psychoactive drugs work, through which help produce intense experiences sometimes described as spiritual or religious to occur. Hence why the subjects on your papers study identify differently post psychoactive drug use…this gene is exactly why they are more susceptible to irrational belief. There are monoamine transporter(2) blockers at the synapse…The next logical step in the god gene research pathway, would be monitoring said expression of the gene, with and without said blockers, with data changes in religiosity. Just a thought at this point.
Dean Hamerin (2004)
Bu PZ Meyers argues: "It’s a pump. A teeny-tiny pump responsible for packaging a neurotransmitter for export during brain activity. Yes, it’s important, and it may even be active and necessary during higher order processing, like religious thought. But one thing it isn’t is a 'god gene. [3]
Thanks cognostic…I have read the wiki page before…but appreciate it. Doc myers is a colourful ex-evangelical atheist,…he absolutely hates, with a capital H christianity. If you read further in that wiki section, they suggest what I am talking about: " However, Hamer notes that the importance of the VMAT2 finding is not that it explains all spiritual or religious feelings, but rather that it points the way toward one neurobiological pathway that may be important. Currently, there are several VMAT2 inhibitors marketed as drugs including deutetrabenazine, tetrabenazine, and valbenazine. The question of the God Gene could be answered by experimental studies."
Interesting study. I would like to see more background information on the participants, especially those who identified as atheist prior to their experience. It would seem that a broader perspective of self-identifying “god concepts” or other “spiritual” views which were present prior to the experience could be enlightening.
For those who define mental experiences in “spiritual” terms, it is essentially an expected result that such a powerful experience as hallucinogenics can provide, would be interpreted as a “spiritual” experience. However, the interpretation of one’s own experience as “spiritual” is largely dependent upon whether alternative candidate explanations are present at the time of the experience, as well as the willingness to consider alternative explanations thereafter.
I found it interesting that the introduction to the study as published for the purpose of recruiting participants stated : “In this survey, we want to characterize various experiences of encounters with something that someone might call: God (e.g., the God of your understanding), Higher Power, Ultimate Reality, or an Aspect or Emissary of God (e.g., an angel)." This leads me to think that perhaps the participants were somewhat biased towards the interpretations of their experiences as being god-related, given the pre-identification of the experience by the researchers, as opposed to a more general identification such as ethereal or transcendent.
It is not common to hear someone remark that they had an unusual brain-related experience, but entirely common to hear a claim of a “spiritual” one. I posit that it is because it has become the go-to explanation for that which there is no other handy one. (argument from personal incredulity or personal ignorance)
Also referred to as Blank Q…
