Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#25,726
#25,726
05_never_again said:
...and the pastor who encouraged them to show up, who was an attendee himself.

So you did just admit that the attendees at the service did endanger others. Important first step.
Click to expand...
Ignoring issues of self preservation to go to church and pray for the health and well being of your family using the argument that its your right is crazy.
 
#25,732
#25,732
Pepe_Silvia said:
So this is justification for brazenly violating the 1A?
Click to expand...
This isn't brazenly violating the 1A.

A brazen violation of the 1A would be shutting down church services in the absence of a clear threat to public health. Or shutting down church services only in response to a pandemic, while other stuff got to remain open.
 
#25,734
#25,734
WALSH: Politicians Are Seizing Virtually Unlimited Power. Do You Think They’re Ever Going To Relinquish It?

Over the weekend, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio warned that “synagogues” and “churches” that disobey his order to remain shut down may be closed permanently as punishment. One can’t help but notice that the good mayor conspicuously omitted one type of worship facility from this dire warning. But whether mosques are exempt or not, the bigger issue is that Bill de Blasio certainly does not have the authority to permanently close places of worship as a punitive measure for defying his commands. He has the word “mayor” in front of his name, not “sultan” or “king” or “supreme leader.” And the First Amendment still exists, even if he’d prefer to pretend otherwise.

GettyImages-1207672339-1-scaled.jpg


But this is just one example of government officials seizing power that does not belong to them. And it’s not only happening in the United States. Over in the UK, police are setting up checkpoints to questions drivers about where they’re going and why. Those deemed to be engaged in “non-essential” travel will be fined. Some UK police departments have gone so far as to deploy drones to track and follow non-essential joggers, hikers, and dog walkers.

Back in the states, the power-drunk Mayor of Chicago, Lori Lightfoot, has decreed that residents may only walk outside for short periods of time. The following is an actual sentence uttered by this person: “Outside is for a brief respite, not for 5Ks.” Yes, Mayor Lightfoot has decided what “outside” is “for,” and anyone who uses “outside” for any reason that does not accord with her wishes will face legal penalties.

WALSH: Politicians Are Seizing Virtually Unlimited Power. Do You Think They’re Ever Going To Relinquish It?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13 and 508mikey
#25,735
#25,735
Orange_Crush said:
Eh... There is nothing in the constitution that says that freedom of religion "shall not be infringed" "unless we're infringing a lot of other things as well; then the gov't can infringe that too."
Click to expand...

Again, I agree. But the infringement in this case has to do with assembly, not religion. And is limited to public gatherings, and not all public gatherings, just ones that aren’t essential.

Now if they don’t prosecute the guy who opens his nightclub but does the pastor who holds service, then I will be the first to his defense. Whether I agree or not with stay home order on its constitutional merits isn’t in question (I don’t btw), but this pastor isn’t being singled out.
 
#25,736
#25,736
05_never_again said:
You also can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater if there isn't a fire.
Click to expand...
I remember when I was in school and I went to the Kentucky game up in Lexington. I and 2 friends sat in the middle of a Kentucky cheering section and yelled Go VOLS at the top of our lungs. I don't recommend it.

Is that a similar idea to the fire in a crowded theatre? Or should we have yelled 'Joe B Hall sucks'? That would probably have started the intended riot.
 
#25,737
#25,737
05_never_again said:
This isn't brazenly violating the 1A.

A brazen violation of the 1A would be shutting down church services in the absence of a clear threat to public health. Or shutting down church services only in response to a pandemic, while other stuff got to remain open.
Click to expand...

There is no threat to anybody who declines to assume the risk.
 
#25,739
#25,739
bnhunt said:
Did you think they were full of shi* when Obama or Clinton were President and got asked difficult questions, which they often did? I bet you were fine with it then.
Click to expand...
I have thought all the press has been full of it for years.....typically mainstream media leans more liberal so they tend to favor those.... I’m not a republican although I lean more conservative in my views.... I have a hard time voting for a democrat on the national stage bc they seem to have lost their way.....Since 1990 I think the best two presidents as far as getting the right things done has been trump and bill clinton.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
#25,743
#25,743
Pepe_Silvia said:
He's admitted that theres no way to be insulated from this virus, which would mean all these stay at home orders and bans on assemblies are pointless.
Click to expand...
Again, you're conflating risk mitigation with risk elimination.

You're essentially implying "there's no way to get the risk to totally zero, so that means do whatever you want."
 
  • Like
Reactions: k-town_king and Behr
#25,745
#25,745
05_never_again said:
Again, you're conflating risk mitigation with risk elimination.

You're essentially implying "there's no way to get the risk to totally zero, so that means do whatever you want."
Click to expand...

There you go! Every individual owns their own body and is responsible for their own health. Mitigate your risk or don't. Its every individuals choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#25,746
#25,746
rjd970 said:
Again, I agree. But the infringement in this case has to do with assembly, not religion. And is limited to public gatherings, and not all public gatherings, just ones that aren’t essential.

Now if they don’t prosecute the guy who opens his nightclub but does the pastor who holds service, then I will be the first to his defense. Whether I agree or not with stay home order on its constitutional merits isn’t in question (I don’t btw), but this pastor isn’t being singled out.
Click to expand...

The free exercise of religion shall not be infringed, unless we infringe a lot of other stuff too... When have I ever said that he is being singled out? I've pointed out that the Constitution doesn't insert the "unless" that you are.
 
#25,749
#25,749
Pepe_Silvia said:
The pastor is not inciting unlawful action simply by holding church services. He and his congregants have a right to assemble and practice their religion. Did he say anything during his sermon that incited "unlawful action?"
Click to expand...
You can't yell "fire" in a crowded building because people may get hurt in the stampede. Likewise you may not be allowed to assemble large crowds when a known highly communicable pathogen is spreading through the population. May be something SCOTUS eventually looks at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: k-town_king
#25,750
#25,750
05_never_again said:
...and the pastor who encouraged them to show up, who was an attendee himself.

So you did just admit that the attendees at the service did endanger others. Important first step.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not admitting that at all just pointing out the absurdity of your position.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top