Do we have the corresponding studies specifically for covid though? Because unlike with most other diseases of interest (read: not common colds or stuff like that), one's type of occupation is directly causally related to covid risk. Roughly speaking, the more contact your job forces you to have with other people, the higher the covid risk.

Also, what you just described is still not proof for a causal relationship between race and health outcomes and we really need that before openly discriminating on the allocation of life-saving treatment with a clear conscience.

Yes. Fucking hell dude. Are you serious? The discrepency between outcomes on Covid between racial groups has been plain as day for a long ass time. It's been studied on and reported to fucking death. Do some honest fucking looking instead of asking for me to hold your hand on this shit. It's been on headlines forever and there's literally a source right in front of you in the OP.

I'm so sick of idiots like you pretending to be "asking questions and being honest" while not doing basic research and "just asking questions" that just ends up spreading doubt over something that was settled a long ass time ago.

Grow up and learn for yourself instead of taking right wing bullshit at face value and putting it on everybody else to disprove it.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 23 2022 02:43pm

The metric being used is the color of one's skin, and the outcome is what healthcare is being denied.
I'm not sure how you're struggling with such a basic concept. Institutional discrimination on the color of one's skin is by definition racism. Providing services to people of one color, and denying it to others, in otherwise identical circumstances, is racist.
You support racist policies. You have been thus far unable to articulate any argument to defend your racism, and instead resorted to calling me glue and yourself rubber.

Try convincing yourself. Make an argument to PARD to show that you can actually rationalize explicit, unabashed institutionalized racism that discriminates against people on the color of their skin. Then put on your pointy white democrat-hat.

Nope. If they were arbitrarily picking races you'd have a point, but they are specifically picking groups that have worse healthcare outcomes and higher risk.

Goom uses "racist lies".

It's not very effective.

You should worry less about the woes of the black community and more about whites becoming a minority in a couple of decades and...not getting prioritized for the poisonous jab.

Imagine being white trash to the point where you have to use a VPN in order to assume your true identity online. oof

Locking up every black person to address their disproportionate crime rates wouldn't be arbitrary either. It would still be racist.
Again, discriminating against people based on the color of their skin is racism. You can't justify it by pointing to proportionality or statistical proclivities or other outcomes, no more than klansmen and eugenicists can insist upon the superiority of the white aryan master race. This is not a difficult concept, and you aren't stupid enough to struggle with it. And furthermore, you're still avoiding the logistics of it. Defining race and creating a code for institutions to formalize their discrimination was a task that the third reich had to put some thought and effort into. If you plan on following in their footsteps, you should figure out how you plan on defining whiteness and who must count as white and be discriminated against and who is enough of a favored race to not get shoved in an oven.

Yep, because you are taking away rights, not distributing something.

Something "being racist" isn't the end-all of morality, nor is it the end-all of constitutionality when you dishonestly characterize "being racist" as considering race in any context at all. When you have a country that actively fucked over a racial group, then pointing out that racial group has worse outcomes isn't bad, even if you can dishonestly characterize it as "being racist".

You're using the definition of "racist" to mean "considers race at all", because you're a dishonest racist. End of story.

It's totally legitimate to identify a community based on needs and outcomes and distributed based on that. It's not being distributed based on race, it's being distributed based on needs and outcomes. Only racists who want to actively fuck over minorities see it as anything else.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 23 2022 02:58pm

you know Goomshill is right by the seismic triggering he has caused.

I salute you, !

Oh god. Are you implying that the decision on who to prioritize on vaccination and treatment ISN'T JUST BASED ON RACE BUT HAS ACTUAL EVIDENCE?

MY GOD YOU'RE SUCH A FUCKING RACIST! HOW DO YOU EVEN SLEEP AT NIGHT?