Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

The Fine print: The following are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Journal by DannyB

Face masks can't go on forever. What we need is a vaccine to get this under control.

But then how do you know whether someone you're interacting with (and no face mask) has been vaccinated? Simple! Have an obvious mark on the right hand or forehead proving the person is safe. You can be sure of who they are. That they were vaccinated. And that they don't have any wrongthink.

Seeing anyone without the mark would be a huge indicator to distance yourself from them. Report them to authorities. Certainly not to do business with them. [Rev 13:16-18]

Fear will drive people to take the mark and report those who don't have it. And it will seem to be the wise thing to do. Even if it is actually a fatal mistake. [Rev 14:9-11] Thanks to the dear leader who made it all happen to keep us safe. Think of the children! Etc.

Such a mandatory vaccine, required for every person on Earth, would definitely not have any undesirable side effects. [Rev 16:2]

Disclaimer: I have not started any "Don't take the mark" messages prior to this journal entry. And certainly would not do so anonymously. The preceding is merely an opinion about how things might go. But I'll just say this:

Don't take the mark! It will cost you to refuse. It won't be easy to refuse.

More, if you find yourself in this situation and are reading this.

Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Reply to Comment Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Arik on Wednesday May 13 2020, @09:58AM (1 child)

    by Arik (4543) on Wednesday May 13 2020, @09:58AM (#993682) Journal
    "I know when Revelation was written, thanks :)"

    That's quite a feat, considering that people who have devoted their life to that study admit they /don't/ know. And considering there simply is no evidence available to settle the question with complete certainty.

    The date ~95 is often considered probable, based on reasonable but far from certain assumptions. Like much of the "new testament" the earliest manuscripts are /much/ later however. It could have been written even earlier, it could also have been done much later, ~250 perhaps, shortly before the earliest manuscript evidence. A range of answers are /possible/ - scholarship argues over which is more probable, in light of what little evidence can be adduced.

    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday May 14 2020, @12:41AM

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday May 14 2020, @12:41AM (#994036) Journal

    Call me naive, but I tend to give "the other side" the benefit of the doubt in pretty much any argument when there isn't enough evidence to conclude otherwise reasonably. *Could* Revelation be later than ~90-95 AD? Sure. But I don't see a problem with going with that date, in light of what we do know.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...