Jump to content

shorty

CSN
  • Posts

    782
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    shorty got a reaction from Bertuzzi44 in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Here’s the thing:
    What makes something criminal or not is not inherent to the action. A (hopefully) civil society, through its governance structures decides that an individual’s right to a particular action is trumped by its effects and consequences on society at large. Driving drunk is criminal only because we’ve already had and settled that conversation in the public sphere. We are currently debating the personal vs public, rights vs responsibilities aspects of vaccines live and ongoing. No one is necessarily suggesting that vaccines would become mandatory in the same sense that driving sober(ish) is mandatory, but we ARE having that conversation, and as a society that is within the realm of possibility. What many people are reacting to is the extreme libertarianism on the part of some, which is sadly not well-informed philosophical libertarianism, at least in my opinion. 

    costarg’s frustration is completely understandable, and yet, canada123’s point is also true that we’re not going to broadly criminalize decision-making for its “intelligence”  
    We will, though, continue to criminalize specific actions and we will continue to criticize poor or selfish choices in the public sphere. I seriously doubt that non-vaccination ever rises to the point that we criminalize it and that’s a good thing.   But along the way we will sure criticize the fuck out of those that don’t have really good and sound reasons to resist it other than “you can’t make me” or “everyone else is lying to you because the internet told me so”.   Our civil society depends on that.  
     
  2. Like
    shorty got a reaction from lenny in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  3. Thanks
    shorty reacted to dyslexic nam in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    I really don’t want to prolong this discussion, so I hesitate to wade in - but this statement is where most defenders of freedom get things blatantly wrong.  Want proof?  Ask the people in Alberta whose necessary surgeries are getting deferred because the intensive care units (and staff) are fully occupied dealing with COVID cases that are occurring at a much higher rate among the unvaccinated.  By refusing to get a basic and simple vaccination, people are not simply taking on a risk themselves.  They are making a choice that, when viewed collectively, absolutely had a negative impact on others.  That is why this group tends to receive criticism   If their choice actually did only impact themselves, lots of people would be perfectly content to let natural selection run its course.  But in a society with socialized medicine, it does not
    Does this impact justify the measures being taken?  People can (and obviously do) have very different opinions on that question.  But make no mistake - the choice to not get vaccinated is not simply an issue of isolated personal risk.  
  4. Like
    shorty got a reaction from lamptern in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    Whether he’s carrying a knock or not, I think Cav has to start in Mexico. David, Davies, etc MUST be starters for the next two games and running them from the start risks that. Also, it’s backwards — attempting to overwhelm the Mexican back line with David and Davies for 60 with Cav coming on late won’t be as effective as having Cav muscle them and body them for 60 followed by the speedsters. Plus, Cav knows many of the Mexican players well from Liga MX and has likely played at Azteca more than anyone, and he was always likely to get fewer minutes in Jamaica and Toronto anyway, barring injuries (knock on wood). Anyways, that’s my two cents.
     
    Agreed that the calls to throw out the A team right away are bizarre. Hopefully the brotherhood mantra prevails over the egos that just want to play every minute. In fairness, it’s a message JH has to finesse. Players do need to believe they can beat any team and yet you also need to sell them on Gambler ethic, ie know when to hold’em, etc. 
  5. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Red and White in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    Whether he’s carrying a knock or not, I think Cav has to start in Mexico. David, Davies, etc MUST be starters for the next two games and running them from the start risks that. Also, it’s backwards — attempting to overwhelm the Mexican back line with David and Davies for 60 with Cav coming on late won’t be as effective as having Cav muscle them and body them for 60 followed by the speedsters. Plus, Cav knows many of the Mexican players well from Liga MX and has likely played at Azteca more than anyone, and he was always likely to get fewer minutes in Jamaica and Toronto anyway, barring injuries (knock on wood). Anyways, that’s my two cents.
     
    Agreed that the calls to throw out the A team right away are bizarre. Hopefully the brotherhood mantra prevails over the egos that just want to play every minute. In fairness, it’s a message JH has to finesse. Players do need to believe they can beat any team and yet you also need to sell them on Gambler ethic, ie know when to hold’em, etc. 
  6. Like
    shorty got a reaction from red card in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Here’s the thing:
    What makes something criminal or not is not inherent to the action. A (hopefully) civil society, through its governance structures decides that an individual’s right to a particular action is trumped by its effects and consequences on society at large. Driving drunk is criminal only because we’ve already had and settled that conversation in the public sphere. We are currently debating the personal vs public, rights vs responsibilities aspects of vaccines live and ongoing. No one is necessarily suggesting that vaccines would become mandatory in the same sense that driving sober(ish) is mandatory, but we ARE having that conversation, and as a society that is within the realm of possibility. What many people are reacting to is the extreme libertarianism on the part of some, which is sadly not well-informed philosophical libertarianism, at least in my opinion. 

    costarg’s frustration is completely understandable, and yet, canada123’s point is also true that we’re not going to broadly criminalize decision-making for its “intelligence”  
    We will, though, continue to criminalize specific actions and we will continue to criticize poor or selfish choices in the public sphere. I seriously doubt that non-vaccination ever rises to the point that we criminalize it and that’s a good thing.   But along the way we will sure criticize the fuck out of those that don’t have really good and sound reasons to resist it other than “you can’t make me” or “everyone else is lying to you because the internet told me so”.   Our civil society depends on that.  
     
  7. Like
    shorty got a reaction from red card in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  8. Like
    shorty reacted to Varsity Tyler in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    It doesn't matter why it kicked off. The anger, venom and hostility which seems to come with this topic is crippling, and calling people 'a$sholes' and 'facking idiots' is flat out rude and unkind. The individuals on the receiving end of those insults are the same people wearing red as part of the support in the stands during these qualifiers. Unfortunately, this sort of behaviour takes the enjoyment out of our forum.
  9. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Club Linesman in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    Whether he’s carrying a knock or not, I think Cav has to start in Mexico. David, Davies, etc MUST be starters for the next two games and running them from the start risks that. Also, it’s backwards — attempting to overwhelm the Mexican back line with David and Davies for 60 with Cav coming on late won’t be as effective as having Cav muscle them and body them for 60 followed by the speedsters. Plus, Cav knows many of the Mexican players well from Liga MX and has likely played at Azteca more than anyone, and he was always likely to get fewer minutes in Jamaica and Toronto anyway, barring injuries (knock on wood). Anyways, that’s my two cents.
     
    Agreed that the calls to throw out the A team right away are bizarre. Hopefully the brotherhood mantra prevails over the egos that just want to play every minute. In fairness, it’s a message JH has to finesse. Players do need to believe they can beat any team and yet you also need to sell them on Gambler ethic, ie know when to hold’em, etc. 
  10. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Xavier. in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  11. Thanks
    shorty got a reaction from longlugan in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Here’s the thing:
    What makes something criminal or not is not inherent to the action. A (hopefully) civil society, through its governance structures decides that an individual’s right to a particular action is trumped by its effects and consequences on society at large. Driving drunk is criminal only because we’ve already had and settled that conversation in the public sphere. We are currently debating the personal vs public, rights vs responsibilities aspects of vaccines live and ongoing. No one is necessarily suggesting that vaccines would become mandatory in the same sense that driving sober(ish) is mandatory, but we ARE having that conversation, and as a society that is within the realm of possibility. What many people are reacting to is the extreme libertarianism on the part of some, which is sadly not well-informed philosophical libertarianism, at least in my opinion. 

    costarg’s frustration is completely understandable, and yet, canada123’s point is also true that we’re not going to broadly criminalize decision-making for its “intelligence”  
    We will, though, continue to criminalize specific actions and we will continue to criticize poor or selfish choices in the public sphere. I seriously doubt that non-vaccination ever rises to the point that we criminalize it and that’s a good thing.   But along the way we will sure criticize the fuck out of those that don’t have really good and sound reasons to resist it other than “you can’t make me” or “everyone else is lying to you because the internet told me so”.   Our civil society depends on that.  
     
  12. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Cblake in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Maybe true, but that sentiment, expressed that way, isn’t super helpful in the whole “having a reasoned conversation in the public sphere” thing, anymore than ridiculing people for taking it. 
     
    Edit: now if you had said “people who won’t take the vaccine based on Nicki Minaj’s opinion as opposed to the entire world’s scientific establishment are fucking idiots” then I would be right there with you.
  13. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Cblake in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Agreed.
     
    Unless he has a really solid and reasoned justification for not getting vaxxed that we don’t know about, and which he has no obligation to share with us. 
     
    But if he is not vaxxed because “ReaSoNs”, yes, I would agree, selfish asshole.  But we don’t know, so… (shrugs shoulders). 
  14. Sad
    shorty got a reaction from masster in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Agreed.
     
    Unless he has a really solid and reasoned justification for not getting vaxxed that we don’t know about, and which he has no obligation to share with us. 
     
    But if he is not vaxxed because “ReaSoNs”, yes, I would agree, selfish asshole.  But we don’t know, so… (shrugs shoulders). 
  15. Like
    shorty got a reaction from rkomar in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Here’s the thing:
    What makes something criminal or not is not inherent to the action. A (hopefully) civil society, through its governance structures decides that an individual’s right to a particular action is trumped by its effects and consequences on society at large. Driving drunk is criminal only because we’ve already had and settled that conversation in the public sphere. We are currently debating the personal vs public, rights vs responsibilities aspects of vaccines live and ongoing. No one is necessarily suggesting that vaccines would become mandatory in the same sense that driving sober(ish) is mandatory, but we ARE having that conversation, and as a society that is within the realm of possibility. What many people are reacting to is the extreme libertarianism on the part of some, which is sadly not well-informed philosophical libertarianism, at least in my opinion. 

    costarg’s frustration is completely understandable, and yet, canada123’s point is also true that we’re not going to broadly criminalize decision-making for its “intelligence”  
    We will, though, continue to criminalize specific actions and we will continue to criticize poor or selfish choices in the public sphere. I seriously doubt that non-vaccination ever rises to the point that we criminalize it and that’s a good thing.   But along the way we will sure criticize the fuck out of those that don’t have really good and sound reasons to resist it other than “you can’t make me” or “everyone else is lying to you because the internet told me so”.   Our civil society depends on that.  
     
  16. Thanks
    shorty got a reaction from CanadaFan123 in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    Here’s the thing:
    What makes something criminal or not is not inherent to the action. A (hopefully) civil society, through its governance structures decides that an individual’s right to a particular action is trumped by its effects and consequences on society at large. Driving drunk is criminal only because we’ve already had and settled that conversation in the public sphere. We are currently debating the personal vs public, rights vs responsibilities aspects of vaccines live and ongoing. No one is necessarily suggesting that vaccines would become mandatory in the same sense that driving sober(ish) is mandatory, but we ARE having that conversation, and as a society that is within the realm of possibility. What many people are reacting to is the extreme libertarianism on the part of some, which is sadly not well-informed philosophical libertarianism, at least in my opinion. 

    costarg’s frustration is completely understandable, and yet, canada123’s point is also true that we’re not going to broadly criminalize decision-making for its “intelligence”  
    We will, though, continue to criminalize specific actions and we will continue to criticize poor or selfish choices in the public sphere. I seriously doubt that non-vaccination ever rises to the point that we criminalize it and that’s a good thing.   But along the way we will sure criticize the fuck out of those that don’t have really good and sound reasons to resist it other than “you can’t make me” or “everyone else is lying to you because the internet told me so”.   Our civil society depends on that.  
     
  17. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Bdog in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  18. Like
    shorty got a reaction from costarg in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    Whether he’s carrying a knock or not, I think Cav has to start in Mexico. David, Davies, etc MUST be starters for the next two games and running them from the start risks that. Also, it’s backwards — attempting to overwhelm the Mexican back line with David and Davies for 60 with Cav coming on late won’t be as effective as having Cav muscle them and body them for 60 followed by the speedsters. Plus, Cav knows many of the Mexican players well from Liga MX and has likely played at Azteca more than anyone, and he was always likely to get fewer minutes in Jamaica and Toronto anyway, barring injuries (knock on wood). Anyways, that’s my two cents.
     
    Agreed that the calls to throw out the A team right away are bizarre. Hopefully the brotherhood mantra prevails over the egos that just want to play every minute. In fairness, it’s a message JH has to finesse. Players do need to believe they can beat any team and yet you also need to sell them on Gambler ethic, ie know when to hold’em, etc. 
  19. Like
    shorty got a reaction from costarg in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  20. Haha
    shorty reacted to king1010 in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    you shouldn’t be annoyed at me for drinking alcohol and driving drunk. I didn’t make the rules and its my personal choice. You should be annoyed at the rules. 
     
    //end sarcasm
  21. Like
    shorty got a reaction from Addona in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  22. Like
    shorty reacted to Sal333 in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    If most of you want to keep the double Ds in reserve and Cavallini is unavailable why not try Schaffelburg? He has played a little CF and he can run like the wind. With Millar, Z.B.G and/or Laryea on the wings you have enough speed up top to have the RCMP file an arrest warrant. If at the end of 60, a win or tie is still in our grasp then you can apply the finishing touches with David, Davies and Buchanan.
  23. Like
    shorty got a reaction from MtlMario in The Importance of Jr. Hoilett   
    And not only that, but choices have consequences for more than just the person making them. “YoU cAn’t teLL mE nOt to driVe dRunK.. I have lots of experience and I know my body best”.  
     
    /sarcasm for those that weren’t sure. 
     
    Getting really tired of the “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do” mantra. It’s juvenile. 
  24. Like
    shorty got a reaction from dyslexic nam in WCQ: Mexico vs Canada - Thursday, Oct 7, 9:40pm Eastern / 6:40pm Pacific - Mexico City   
    Whether he’s carrying a knock or not, I think Cav has to start in Mexico. David, Davies, etc MUST be starters for the next two games and running them from the start risks that. Also, it’s backwards — attempting to overwhelm the Mexican back line with David and Davies for 60 with Cav coming on late won’t be as effective as having Cav muscle them and body them for 60 followed by the speedsters. Plus, Cav knows many of the Mexican players well from Liga MX and has likely played at Azteca more than anyone, and he was always likely to get fewer minutes in Jamaica and Toronto anyway, barring injuries (knock on wood). Anyways, that’s my two cents.
     
    Agreed that the calls to throw out the A team right away are bizarre. Hopefully the brotherhood mantra prevails over the egos that just want to play every minute. In fairness, it’s a message JH has to finesse. Players do need to believe they can beat any team and yet you also need to sell them on Gambler ethic, ie know when to hold’em, etc. 
  25. Like
    shorty reacted to Halbouni_12 in Belal Halbouni   
    Yes he is my lil cousin. We are proud. He is working hard and developing quickly. He is trusting the process and getting a bit of recognition. He still have room to develop. The good thing is Canada team is doing well and there are some promising players stepping in. I love our national team. And would be great and a dream come true if he was part of it now or later. The criticism is fine. People have their own opinions. Our skin is thick and will keep moving on. Negative comments won’t effect his abilities. He is a humble kid that is trying to live out his dream and trying to get better every day. There are a lot of Canadian youngsters that look promising as well. I wish every footballer has a chance to live out their dream and hopefully can help out national team our for the future of Canada soccer. 
    Nothing but love!!
×
×
  • Create New...