Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

#25,802
#25,802
Orange_Crush said:
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.
Click to expand...


The temporary restriction against large gatherings, regardless of the content of the speech, is the key. Under the circumstances these are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. Under Supreme Court precedent describing intermediate scrutiny of TPM restrictions, and under the current circumstances, I am sure such limits are fine.
 
#25,803
#25,803
1972 Grad said:
Most everyone is open here. The florists, garden centers, engine shop, lawn mower shop, golf shop, etc. Hardly anything is closed.
Click to expand...

Other than the grocery store and gas station the only places I really go are gym, barber shop, and the pub. They are all closed. 😔
 
#25,804
#25,804
lawgator1 said:
The temporary restriction against large gatherings, regardless of the content of the speech, is the key. Under the circumstances these are reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. Under Supreme Court precedent describing intermediate scrutiny of TPM restrictions, and under the current circumstances, I am sure such limits are fine.
Click to expand...

Either you have unmitigated rights at all times, or you don’t.

Which does the BoR lay out?

I don’t recall reading, “when sickness fells thy neighbor, and thy neighbor’s neighbor, in great number and scope, rescind your rights unto government authority.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40, Matt2496, Orange_Crush and 2 others
#25,806
#25,806
Franklin Pierce said:
Dead Bodies are loaded into refrigerated Trucks outside New York hospitals after 98 people died in seven HOURS - bringing city's death toll to 790 and cases to 36,221 - as Mayor de Blasio warns people may be fined $500 for not staying home

26581342-8167283-image-a-7_1585566684533.jpg


Coronavirus US: Dead bodies are loaded onto truck with forklift | Daily Mail Online
Click to expand...
Thought the libs were anti jailing poor people for nonviolent offenses?
 
#25,807
#25,807
rjd970 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Geezus, dude... If the Bible says "Don't neglect gathering" (and it does, as I quoted. And they take that as a literal necessity, but the gov't says "Yah, well, piss off. You can't gather"... You don't see how the gov't is dictating how they exercise their religion?

Take all of that out. Just simply... You don't see how the gov't saying, "Yo can exercise your religion, but only how we tell you" is dictating how they exercise their religion?

Like I said to GA, we made the decision to close services and stream for a short time. But if this goes on, we may decide to break the gov't mandate b/c we believe it's important not to forsake the congragation. You don't have to agree. GA doesn't have to agree any more than I have to believe that peyote root is required for religious observance. I'll still defend the native american's right to use it as a religious exercise.
 
#25,810
#25,810
Orange_Crush said:
Geezus, dude... If the Bible says "Don't neglect gathering" (and it does, as I quoted. And they take that as a literal necessity, but the gov't says "Yah, well, piss off. You can't gather"... You don't see how the gov't is dictating how they exercise their religion?

Take all of that out. Just simply... You don't see how the gov't saying, "Yo can exercise your religion, but only how we tell you" is dictating how they exercise their religion?

Like I said to GA, we made the decision to close services and stream for a short time. But if this goes on, we may decide to break the gov't mandate b/c we believe it's important not to forsake the congragation. You don't have to agree. GA doesn't have to agree any more than I have to believe that peyote root is required for religious observance. I'll still defend the native american's right to use it as a religious exercise.
Click to expand...

For the actual.

All I’m saying is if some guy wants to sacrifice a cow, then go ahead. If he wants to do it in a public market, then the health department will have something to say about it. If snake handlers want to handle poisonous snakes, then so be it. If they want to to it in public around me or me kid, then I have something to say about it.

This is not about religion. This is about public safety. Show me where they are saying people can’t congregate. The only thing I’m seeing is they are saying how they congregate, and it is for a limited amount of time.

The victim card is strong with your argument.
 
#25,811
#25,811
Girth Brooks said:
Either you have unmitigated rights at all times, or you don’t.

Which does the BoR lay out?

I don’t recall reading, “when sickness fells thy neighbor, and thy neighbor’s neighbor, in great number and scope, rescind your rights unto government authority.”
Click to expand...


No, that's not correct. There are many ways in which your rights are limited by the larger needs of the Republic and its citizens pretty much every day.

The issue is not as sophomoric as absolute versus limited. It depends on the right and the circumstances.

The reason the social distancing and limits on crowd size are constitutional are primarily that: a) they do not apply only to religious gatherings, or to a particular one; b) there is a compelling state interest justifying them; and c) there are alternative avenues for relaying your message.

The "loss of signal," if you want to use that phrase, which is caused by not being together is heavily outweighed by the state's interest in preventing spread of the disease.
 
#25,812
#25,812
allvol123 said:
Maybe I am getting my days mixed but thought I saw NY at 85 this morning. Which would match the death every 17 minutes narrative I also heard. I hope I am correct.
Click to expand...

They ended up revising yesterday’s numbers once New York finally reported this morning and it included deaths from yesterday after the 10 am update. Yesterday’s deaths ended up being 363 (still lower than the previous two days, but we are already over that today and don’t have NY’s late numbers).
 
#25,814
#25,814
TennTradition said:
They ended up revising yesterday’s numbers once New York finally reported this morning and it included deaths from yesterday after the 10 am update. Yesterday’s deaths ended up being 363 (still lower than the previous two days, but we are already over that today and don’t have NY’s late numbers).
Click to expand...

Yea, I saw that. Still encouraging as you say. Hope for the same today.
 
#25,817
#25,817
rjd970 said:
For the actual.

All I’m saying is if some guy wants to sacrifice a cow, then go ahead. If he wants to do it in a public market, then the health department will have something to say about it. If snake handlers want to handle poisonous snakes, then so be it. If they want to to it in public around me or me kid, then I have something to say about it.

This is not about religion. This is about public safety. Show me where they are saying people can’t congregate. The only thing I’m seeing is they are saying how they congregate, and it is for a limited amount of time.

The victim card is strong with your argument.
Click to expand...
Those analogies are stupid. Keep you and yourself away from the churches.

Further, your argument seems to be:

  1. "I don't believe the services are a public danger."
  2. "The government isn't dictating how they exercise their religion."
  3. "The government is dictating how they exercise their religion, but they have a good excuse for doing so because the services are a public danger."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#25,819
#25,819
Orange_Crush said:
Those analogies are stupid. Keep you and yourself away from the churches.

Further, your argument seems to be:

  1. "I don't believe the services are a public danger."
  2. "The government isn't dictating how they exercise their religion."
  3. "The government is dictating how they exercise their religion, but they have a good excuse for doing so because the services are a public danger."
Click to expand...

The only thing right is #1, which I’ve said from the beginning. However being that this is not only limited to church gatherings, but ALL gatherings, it pretty clearly demonstrates this is not a religious issue to anybody except the religious.

This stupidity of an order applies across the board to everybody. This guy isn’t a victim because of his religion, he is a victim because of his local government.
 
#25,820
#25,820
rjd970 said:
The only thing right is #1, which I’ve said from the beginning. However being that this is not only limited to church gatherings, but ALL gatherings, it pretty clearly demonstrates this is not a religious issue to anybody except the religious.

This stupidity of an order applies across the board to everybody. This guy isn’t a victim because of his religion, he is a victim because of his local government.
Click to expand...
Yah. That's the point of the Constitution and its protection of the free exercise of religion. For the religious, Cochise.
 
#25,824
#25,824
Orange_Crush said:
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.
Click to expand...
That is not true. The Free Exercise Clause does not prohibit the government from enforcing its laws, even when those laws run counter to religious practices. This is why the United States government is just when prohibiting bigamy on the part of Mormons.

REYNOLDS v. UNITED STATES (1878)

Of federal territorial laws, the Supreme Court said: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may interfere with practices." If there is a law or ordinance prohibiting assembly during a time of quarantine, the government may enforce such a law as it pertains to church services.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top