Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#25,778
#25,778
Orange_Crush said:
You're telling them how to exercise their religion?



Again... The free exercise of religion shall not be infringed...
Click to expand...

No they aren’t. Nobody is saying they can’t practice their religion. Nobody is even saying they can’t congregate together.

They are just saying for the time being, you can’t do it in person and in large numbers. If you are saying prohibition of meeting together in groups of 10 or more is an infringement of religion more than an infringement of assembly then Ok, but that is a pretty big stretch IMO.
 
#25,781
#25,781
Orange_Crush said:
No. I'm not. What gave you that idea?

There's no slope about it. I'm saying that it's a blatant infringement of constitutional rights to exercise freedom of religion, freedom of movement, and freedom of association. And that if you're afraid of the virus, stay home. You won't come into contact with all those people you're afraid of.

Where did you come up with a "slippery slope" argument in all of that?
Click to expand...
Uh, maybe because you said "So, you're infringing personal liberties on a slippery slope. Piss off." Just maybe?

Also, read what @GAVol said:
I agree in principle. Problem is that if somebody picks up the virus at a gathering and then leaves, those they may come in indirect contact with afterwards aren’t given a choice.
Click to expand...
 
#25,782
#25,782
Orange_Crush said:
You're telling them how to exercise their religion?



Again... The free exercise of religion shall not be infringed...
Click to expand...
Here’s another fun one....
1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
Click to expand...
 
#25,785
#25,785
rjd970 said:
No they aren’t. Nobody is saying they can’t practice their religion. Nobody is even saying they can’t congregate together.

They are just saying for the time being, you can’t do it in person and in large numbers. If you are saying prohibition of meeting together in groups of 10 or more is an infringement of religion more than an infringement of assembly then Ok, but that is a pretty big stretch IMO.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. And freedom of religion was specifically put into the constitution to keep gov't from defining how to exercise religion because...you know... England had defined how to exercise religion. It's not a stretchto say thatgov't has no busines telling religions how to exercise religion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40
#25,789
#25,789
GAVol said:
Here’s another fun one....
Click to expand...

Let’s put this in context.....

If an authority is summoning you to sin, you most certainly rebel against their order. God’s order is higher than earthly authority.

Your statement is more applicable to the case of “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” (i.e. taxes, etc.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush
#25,790
#25,790
GordonC said:
Man, I have no quarrel with you, but this is very incorrect information.

The Schenck vs. US case was a First Amendment case, and the ruling was that you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater (unless there is a fire).
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't. (or at least not as you posited) That case was predicated on if Schenk's actions would fall outside 1A protection vs the Espionage Act. Holmes riffing about fires and theaters was not part of the case and nothing to do with actual law.
 
#25,792
#25,792
Orange_Crush said:
That's what I'm saying. And freedom of religion was specifically put into the constitution to keep gov't from defining how to exercise religion because...you know... England had defined how to exercise religion. It's not a stretchto say thatgov't has no busines telling religions how to exercise religion.
Click to expand...

I still don’t think the government is dictating how this guy can practice his religion, it is dictating how many people can be in the same public place. But ok.
 
#25,793
#25,793
Girth Brooks said:
Let’s put this in context.....

If an authority is summoning you to sin, you most certainly rebel against their order. God’s order is higher than earthly authority.

Your statement is more applicable to the case of “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” (i.e. taxes, etc.).
Click to expand...
I know. I just like to mix in some proof texting on the rare occasions when I troll.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Girth Brooks
#25,797
#25,797
GAVol said:
Here’s another fun one....
Click to expand...
I'm arguing constitution more than theology, in that it's not gov't place to define for them how to exercise their religion.

To a degree, I agree with you and that's why we went "broadcast-only" to abide the Chattanooga mandate. However, the theology of your quote needs to be tempered by the idea that you submit until they command you to break your conscience (See Acts 4:19,20.)

Thus, constitutionally, and Biblically, it's not for the gov't to define how we are to exercise our religion.
 
#25,798
#25,798
carlos86 said:
Thus will be the reason why this isn’t going away anytime soon. Home Depot is limiting the amount of people who are allowed in their stores. I wouldn’t be surprised if Lowe’s did the same.
Click to expand...
Lowe's said later today to not bring your family along when you shop. This morning , my wife said women had their snot-nosed kids tagging along, touching everything in the store. She left.
 
#25,800
#25,800
05_never_again said:
Uh, maybe because you said "So, you're infringing personal liberties on a slippery slope. Piss off." Just maybe?

Also, read what @GAVol said:
Click to expand...
The slippery slope referenced was yours. In other words, your argument was "the concept of 'safe' is a slippery slope, so let's just infringe your rights".

And per GAVol, not if you won;t let them in your house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weezy
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top