Please Take COVID-19 Seriously
Start writing a post

11 days ago on March 10th I stood a block down the street from Times Square, waiting to get tickets to one of Broadway's hottest new shows, Hadestown. Winner of eight Tonies at the 73rd iteration of those awards, including Best Musical and Best Original Score, the air was fraught with excitement. If we had played our cards right, my friends and I were about to purchase tickets (albeit standing room only) to this amazing show for only $39, original Broadway cast and all.

As we eagerly awaited our chance to peer through the velvet curtain of the Walter Kerr Theatre, the air was fraught with something else as well: a sense of nervousness. With no one but each other to produce entertainment during our two-hour wait in line, conversation meandered a number of directions, including to that of the novel coronavirus that's been sweeping the nation (and the world) in COVID-19.

"It's not really that bad, is it?" I wondered out loud as my friends recounted story after story about universities closing all across the country. We openly wondered if our university would be next. "I mean, aren't people overreacting?"

In hindsight, this seems like a foolhardy thing to say. And yet, at the time the threat of the virus was genuinely distant. It was still easy to think of COVID-19 as a foreign disease, promulgated abroad, that would likely see a few isolated cases in the United States, but nothing serious. Even with universities from Stanford to Harvard already closed or closing on March 10th, it didn't quite seem possible that our little corner of the world in Atlanta would shutter up shop in the same way.

I was sorely mistaken.

Fast forward to now, and the threat of COVID-19 has made itself clear. The virus is spreading in the United States at an exponential rate, and more people are dying every day. At the time of my writing this on March 21st, there have been 23,662 confirmed cases of the virus in the United States and 322 people have died of it. More are sure to follow.

The outbreak has ballooned to such a degree that it is not simply my life that has been interrupted, but the lives of practically all other Americans as well. K-12 education has been suspended or moved online in virtually all states. Sports leagues have postponed or canceled their seasons. Restaurants and bars have called it quits for now. Even that aforementioned Broadway shut down just two days after I visited. And in six different states (California, Illinois, New York, Connecticut, Oregon, and New Jersey) residents have been ordered to shelter in place and to only venture outside if it is absolutely necessary. The restrictions in those three states alone affect more than 88 million people.

In short, the novel coronavirus has completely rewritten the fabric of American life, and as it continues to spread and uncertainty continues to mount, there is sure to be ever greater disruption.

Which is why I am in no short order baffled by the response of some of those closest to me. Some tweets read that the coronavirus is nothing more than a hoax, hyped up by either Donald Trump to give himself a "wartime" edge or his Democratic opponents to bring the president down in a pandemic terror. Others, from the elderly to parents of young children, have summarily dismissed the virus as something they need not be concerned about.

"It's just like the flu. In fact, the flu kills more people."

"If I get corona, I get corona. At the end of the day, I'm not going to let it stop me from partying."

"We literally have tens of thousands of people on the highways every year, but we don't shut them down. We accept the risk. We lose tens of thousands of people to the normal flu, yet we're not putting up the body count on a weekly basis."

That last quote comes from my representative to the United States Senate, Sen. Ron Johnson, in an op-ed he wrote just yesterday for the Wall Street Journal, and frankly I'm deeply ashamed. To carry on with Mr. Johnson's maligned highway analogy, we might accept the risk inherent in driving a car, but we do so with all the peace of mind afforded by seatbelts, airbags, and sober, licensed drivers. With COVID-19 we have none of that: no vaccine, no antivirals, little knowledge of how quickly it spreads and kills.

In truth, I highly doubt that Mr. Johnson would be so eager to climb aboard American interstates if he were deprived of such basic necessities as brakes or a steering wheel.

And while the debate over how seriously to take day-to-day restrictions with the virus have manifested in the same predictable tenor of an old vs. young generational cage fight, I'm not sure that simple explanation is really so apt. There are plenty of folks my age and younger who are still out celebrating everything from St. Patrick's Day to spring break, drinking and making merry per usual, including congregating in large groups. And plenty of older people I know have also refused to take the virus seriously, carrying on their typical routines in everything from shopping excursions to Sunday church attendance.

The whole of the situation is this: COVID-19 is a serious danger, a bona fide global pandemic as officially codified by the World Health Organization and tackling it will necessitate that we treat it seriously. That means practicing such sanitary habits as washing hands, as well as social distancing in order to slow its transmission.

The bit on social distancing is especially huge, because there is some evidence that the virus may remain alive and active, even in people who show no symptoms or who have survived the worst of the symptoms, for up to 37 days. And even though the mortality rate of the virus may "only" be about 1%, if the virus infects half of the planet that means somewhere on the scale of 40 million people could die. That's a figure not seen in any public health capacity in over 100 years.

So, in response to my much younger and naiver self, are people overreacting? The answer is no. It may be difficult, but reordering life for this moment in time is entirely the right thing to do.

Please take COVID-19 seriously.

From Your Site Articles
Report this Content
This article has not been reviewed by Odyssey HQ and solely reflects the ideas and opinions of the creator.
Tumblr

Chick-fil-A, I love you.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

An open letter to my father

What you did sounds dumb to me

712
An open letter to my father
The Truth About My Parents' Divorce

Considering im 18 now & you're one of the best men i've ever met since you have a child; me. I want you to know that I love you, more than anyone, I love you. I don't forgive you for the way you hurt my mother. I'm hurt because you broke our family. Thing went down hill the day you found Laquita. You we're distant & shortly after my mother turned into the coldest, saddest women to walk past me. She's my best friend & so are you. Not one day goes by where I don't wonder what she did wrong. How on earth could you trade your family & the women who loved you unconditionally for a home wrecker? Sounds dumb to me.

Keep Reading... Show less
Featured

Is God Reckless?

Exploring the controversy behind the popular worship song "Reckless Love"

1779
Is God Reckless?


First things first I do not agree with people getting so caught up in the specific theology of a song that they forget who they are singing the song to. I normally don't pay attention to negative things that people say about worship music, but the things that people were saying caught my attention. For example, that the song was not biblical and should not be sung in churches. Worship was created to glorify God, and not to argue over what kind of theology the artist used to write the song. I was not made aware of the controversy surrounding the popular song "Reckless Love" by Cory Asbury until about a week ago, but now that I am aware this is what I have concluded.The controversy surrounding the song is how the term reckless is used to describe God's love. This is the statement that Cory Asbury released after many people questioned his theology regarding his lyrics. I think that by trying to clarify what the song was saying he added to the confusion behind the controversy.This is what he had to say,
"Many have asked me for clarity on the phrase, "reckless love". Many have wondered why I'd use a "negative" word to describe God. I've taken some time to write out my thoughts here. I hope it brings answers to your questions. But more than that, I hope it brings you into an encounter with the wildness of His love.When I use the phrase, "the reckless love of God", I'm not saying that God Himself is reckless. I am, however, saying that the way He loves, is in many regards, quite so. What I mean is this: He is utterly unconcerned with the consequences of His actions with regards to His own safety, comfort, and well-being. His love isn't crafty or slick. It's not cunning or shrewd. In fact, all things considered, it's quite childlike, and might I even suggest, sometimes downright ridiculous. His love bankrupted heaven for you. His love doesn't consider Himself first. His love isn't selfish or self-serving. He doesn't wonder what He'll gain or lose by putting Himself out there. He simply gives Himself away on the off-chance that one of us might look back at Him and offer ourselves in return.His love leaves the ninety-nine to find the one every time."
Some people are arguing that song is biblical because it makes reference to the scripture from Matthew 28:12-14 and Luke 15. Both of these scriptures talk about the parable of the lost sheep and the shepherd. The shepherd symbolizes God and the lost sheep are people that do not have a relationship with God. On the other hand some people are arguing that using the term reckless, referring to God's character is heretical and not biblical. I found two articles that discuss the controversy about the song.The first article is called, "Reckless Love" By Cory Asbury - "Song Meaning, Review, and Worship Leading Tips." The writer of the article, Jake Gosselin argues that people are "Making a mountain out of a molehill" and that the argument is foolish. The second article, "God's Love is not Reckless, Contrary to What You Might Sing" by author Andrew Gabriel argues that using the term reckless is irresponsible and that you cannot separate Gods character traits from God himself. For example, saying that God's love is reckless could also be argued that God himself is reckless. Reckless is typically not a word that someone would use to describe God and his love for us. The term reckless is defined as (of a person or their actions) without thinking or caring about the consequences of an action. However, Cory Asbury is not talking about a person, he is talking about God's passionate and relentless pursuit of the lost. While I would not have chosen the word reckless, I understand what he was trying to communicate through the song. Down below I have linked two articles that might be helpful if you are interested in reading more about the controversy.


Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

10 Signs You Grew Up In A Small Town

Whether you admit it or not, that tiny town will always have your heart.

1662
The Odyssey

1. You still talk to people that you went to elementary school with.

These are the people you grew up with and the people you graduated high school with. The faces you see in kindergarten are the same faces you’ll see for the rest of your life.

Keep Reading... Show less
Student Life

150 Words For Anyone Who Loves Football Games

Why I love high school football games, even though I don't like football.

2678
Dallas News

When most think of high school they think of friend drama, parties, getting your drivers license, and best of all foot ball games.

Keep Reading... Show less

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Facebook Comments