“No Plans to Postpone Session” Says GC President Ted Wilson in March 16 Video Announcement

The dangerous thing is that people without symptoms can, without even knowing that they have the virus, infect other people. I don’t care if I get the virus, but I care about others that I might infect. If an elderly person will suffer because of me falsely thinking I am “safe” as an Adventist, then I am not living out the gospel.


I heard yesterday from someone claiming to have inside information that the meeting will be postponed for two years. I’m guessing the source has it wrong, or maybe the source is adding spin to their understanding of closed-door discussions. My guess is that if the meetings are canceled (I’d bet money on it), it may be too difficult to reschedule and reorganize within a 1-year time frame, hence the two years. But I don’t know.

Some are commenting on how ordinary SDAs and others (apart from the elderly) should survive this virus just fine. But…how many of us know younger SDAs who suffer from obesity, diabetes, asthma, high blood pressure, or other “underlying conditions” that predispose us to severe viral symptoms? To a greater extent outside our church, there are those who smoke and vape. Americans may be more vulnerable to this virus than many appreciate. And it won’t help matters that our hospitals will be taxed beyond capacity.


I don’t believe this approach is sufficient for prevention of this virus.


Well, he still left out the Gospel as something to share with others.


Here in Louisiana we are under orders to have no gatherings over 10 people, punishable by $500 fine or 6 months in jail. Enforceable by local, parish, and state law enforcement, so that’s definitely a possibility.


social gatherings

1 Like

If you could clarify a little bit your question, it would be easier for me to tell my opinion. What exactly do you mean?

Meanwhile, in my almost 70 years on this planet, 30 of them living in the US, what I have seen is that, 1) Republicans support the rich class no matter what. Tax cuts always favor the rich, making them richer; and, 2) Democrats always support the middle class and the poor, with many social programs and an economic style that helps them to reach the American dream more easily.

This is what I see, this is my opinion. Based not on party bias, but only on what I see them doing. Not what Fox or MSNBC, or CNN say but what I see happening and listening to the politicians as they speak and act, The difference is obvious, and aberrant.

Right now, when a tragic situation surfaces with the COVID-19, suddenly the Trump administration comes up with a totally socialist move: $1tri to give a hand to those the American population and businesses. The anti-socialistic gang suddenly acting in a socialistic way. If they had in place a less polarizing economic model, the population would be financially more homogeneous and able to take care of themselves during a crisis. But a vulture capitalism, and a vulture economic model will never allow more homogeneity, because it is based on a polarization between the rich class and the rest of “us the people.”

Just the way I see it. Nothing but my opinion.


Postpone the Session!?..buys the Fuhrer a bit more time at the top?


If they cancel, they should definitely find a way to have (at least an interim Prez for the time after June/2020. But, this is not going to happen with this kind of people that manage the GC now. So, it will end up probably like your source told you.

I suspect that the same will happen with the Federal government. Martial Law declared first, then elections being suspended indefinitely - because only Trump can take the country out of this confusion… :roll_eyes:

1 Like

I know that’s what is said but I look at Hollywood and our major tech companies like Google and the money that gets extracted especially during election years. Plus you got people like Styles and Bloomburg, billions upon billions at their ready. So my question is do you think either party cares where the money comes from? See I don’t think they care. They say bah humbug to Corps but come to the Bay Area, Silicon Valley and hold these big fundraisers in a state that is signed sealed and delivered liberal and candidates are not concerned one bit.

Talking points don’t speak nearly as loud as actions. Along those lines the conservatives do the exact same thing. Political figures IMO really don’t care where the money comes from as long as it comes.

1 Like

Of course it’s not. It just helps you to die in a more peaceful state of mind… :wink:


George…try this definition … “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.”

― Margaret Thatcher


Yes, money is certainly a temptation for all. And it always plays a role in politics. This is why I agree that an electoral reform is past due, to stop the use of those gigantic moneys.

Also, I feel that stopping this “electoral college” nonsense is also past due. Can’t say a country is democratic when the majority does not win elections. The EC was created as a corrupt manipulation tool. And so it still is. Time to reform.

Just my opinions.

1 Like

When I refer to Socialism, I have in mind Democratic Socialism as it is in Scandinavia. Nothing Like Venezuela, that some people also call “Socialism” but it’s nothing but corrupt dictatorship. We have to be very careful with leaders who have “dictatorship” tendencies…


There are certain to be some areas of the world where “visitors” to the U.S.
will not be allowed to enter.
Depending on how things work out with this particular virus.
This is the FIRST time there has been panic in the world system over a virus.
There have been other world flus but this is the first to make a major front page
placement in the news. And to cause this much panic.

It is also time for the conspiracy theorists to pop up. The “Buy and Sell Issue”.


George, I’m in Australia, so I’m pehaps more closely aligned to thier definition of 'socialism".

I’m not not too sure whether this site allows ‘links’, but I just came across. I loved the analogies!!:innocent: this.https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/socialists-progressives-spending-other-peoples-money-are-not-generous/

you have no argument from me on this point…i was simply pointing out to jaray that our health message gives us an advantage over others when it is followed…

And valuable opinion for me to hear so thank you. But let me respond to the electoral college. First America is not and never has been a democratic form of government. We are a republic. If we were a democratic system then your right the college wouldn’t make sense.

Our founding fathers had the a concern that the densely part of the country would control all election outcomes. States like Taxifonia and NY would elect every president. Candidates would only need to campaign in two states because they would win the popular vote and the other 48 states would be just observers.

As to election finance reform, both parties jump up and down, and have for years talked about the dire need to reform that part of elections but I have never seen a bill from either side. Let me close by saying that while the system in America is not perfect, it’s sure a lot better than any country’s system. But I appreciate fully where your frustration comes from when the popular vote just doesn’t seem to be fair.


51% is not a popular majority! Just 2% off a popular minority!! How does 2% of the population get to tell 49% of the population how to live and spend your taxes?

I vehemently oppose spending other people’s money. I do not support anything that will take money from one person to give to another. Maybe we need a new name for a certain approach, like “Non-Vulture-Capitalism.” I would support such.

Personally I believe that if the middle class in a country is strong, the country is prosperous. The stronger the middle class, the stronger the country. The MC buy and move the economy. Proportionally, the rich buy nothing. Some Rolls Royce once in a while? What good does that do? The MC means volume, like millions of cars - this makes a great difference. But if they cannot afford those cars, well… the economy is just weak and stagnated. And the rich will still buy their Rolls Royces anyway…