COVID-19 Response: An issue that shouldn't be at all political....yet here we are

[SiteWolf]

This is so insane. How is controlling a pandemic partisan...

“On Wednesday, Justice Barrett dealt the chief justice a body blow. She cast the decisive vote in a 5-to-4 ruling that rejected restrictions on religious services in New York imposed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to combat the coronavirus, shoving the chief justice into dissent with the court’s three remaining liberals. It was one of six opinions the court issued on Wednesday, spanning 33 pages and opening a window on a court in turmoil.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/u...e=articleShare


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

only that's not partisan IMO, it's based on a religious person believing people should be able to attend worship services, if for no other reason the mental health aspects involved....yes, in this case, we're talking about a conservative justice, but it's not like no Democrats are religious

also not quite sure why they're pulling out Barrett's vote as the 'body blow'....I mean 4 others voted as she did

[Crovash]

This is so insane. How is controlling a pandemic partisan...

“On Wednesday, Justice Barrett dealt the chief justice a body blow. She cast the decisive vote in a 5-to-4 ruling that rejected restrictions on religious services in New York imposed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo to combat the coronavirus, shoving the chief justice into dissent with the court’s three remaining liberals. It was one of six opinions the court issued on Wednesday, spanning 33 pages and opening a window on a court in turmoil.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/26/u...e=articleShare

[SiteWolf]

you should get tested...any other symptoms? fever, loss of smell?

[blams]

only that's not partisan IMO, it's based on a religious person believing people should be able to attend worship services, if for no other reason the mental health aspects involved....yes, in this case, we're talking about a conservative justice, but it's not like no Democrats are religious

also not quite sure why they're pulling out Barrett's vote as the 'body blow'....I mean 4 others voted as she did

Religious services should still be just as affected during a pandemic as anything else. No matter the "mental health " benefits of them.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

[rhino17]

Religious services should still be just as affected during a pandemic as anything else. No matter the "mental health " benefits of them.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

I agree. There is no reason that can't be done remotely via zoom or any other number of web services. Its actually a service that shouldn't have any issues adapting to that. You can facilitate the entire church at full capacity that way.

I grew up blocks from Joel Osteen's Church. His scam is broadcasted nationally every week on TV. There is no reason he needs people at his monstrosity as well. For him its just a cash grab.

[SiteWolf]

Religious services should still be just as affected during a pandemic as anything else. No matter the "mental health " benefits of them.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

So, separation of church and state only goes one direction then?

No, it's not that I don't understand, I was commenting that the SC judgement wasn't necessarily partisan

[dbroncos78087]

only that's not partisan IMO, it's based on a religious person believing people should be able to attend worship services, if for no other reason the mental health aspects involved....yes, in this case, we're talking about a conservative justice, but it's not like no Democrats are religious

also not quite sure why they're pulling out Barrett's vote as the 'body blow'....I mean 4 others voted as she did

The five of them voted to protect people’s rights to be what I call social Christians. They are people who don’t really give two ****s about religion but want to be seen being so. They want to gossip mostly about who isn’t following the rules that they probably aren’t following themselves. It’s a big reason why I hold the views I do on this general subject. They are the ones who use it as a means of social advancement.

[SiteWolf]

The five of them voted to protect people’s rights to be what I call social Christians. They are people who don’t really give two ****s about religion but want to be seen being so. They want to gossip mostly about who isn’t following the rules that they probably aren’t following themselves. It’s a big reason why I hold the views I do on this general subject. They are the ones who use it as a means of social advancement.

and there you go again.........you have NO idea who is and who isn't a Christian or even a clue to what that means...and you're not worth my time to argue with on the subject

but, you also have ZERO idea why the five of them voted as they did, you only have your greatly skewed assumptions

[spliff(TONE)]

Religious services should still be just as affected during a pandemic as anything else. No matter the "mental health " benefits of them.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Indeed. Loads of these churches are trying to act like they're being treated unfairly because they're not getting special privileges during a pandemic (which makes no sense).

[spliff(TONE)]

I agree. There is no reason that can't be done remotely via zoom or any other number of web services. Its actually a service that shouldn't have any issues adapting to that. You can facilitate the entire church at full capacity that way.

I grew up blocks from Joel Osteen's Church. His scam is broadcasted nationally every week on TV. There is no reason he needs people at his monstrosity as well. For him its just a cash grab.

Exactly.

[catman]

My church has been doing remote services since mid-March with a couple of weeks of live services in October. The Covid rate started climbing again and our state Bishop made the recommendation that we go remote again. No state mandate was issued to us and we are not forced to comply. I am an elder in the church and was asked for my input, as I deal with Covid more than most in the church do (I am not the only healthcare professional in the church. We have several MDs that offered their advice) and I suggested that we go to remote services.
This is how I feel churches should handle the pandemic and the gist of the supreme court ruling was that states cannot mandate church decisions.

[spliff(TONE)]

States should absolutely be able to mandate social distancing measures at churches during a pandemic. Instead, many churches and their leaders are being reckless, selfish, and short-sighted about demanding their right to congregate en masse and in close quarters (along with knowingly and willfully breaking local health regulations if need be), despite the risk and despite the proliferation of live streaming options.

[SiteWolf]

Indeed. Loads of these churches are trying to act like they're being treated unfairly because they're not getting special privileges during a pandemic (which makes no sense).

Maybe I'm wrong, but this wasn't about getting special privileges, this was about not being restricted MORE than other places far as I read, like they were being limited in people, not in percentage of capacity.

[SiteWolf]

States should absolutely be able to mandate social distancing measures at churches during a pandemic. Instead, many churches and their leaders are being reckless, selfish, and short-sighted about demanding their right to congregate en masse and in close quarters (along with knowingly and willfully breaking local health regulations if need be), despite the risk and despite the proliferation of live streaming options.

but when you say 'many churches' are you meaning because you've seen some on TV from big churches down south with full crowds? Or are you seeing more than that. Locally, there's been 50% capacities allowed...same for everybody, bars, restaurants, and churches...as opposed to some places talking numbers, which would mean a restaurant with a capacity for 150 could only have 100 people, but a church with capacity for 500 could also only have 100

[dbroncos78087]

States should absolutely be able to mandate social distancing measures at churches during a pandemic. Instead, many churches and their leaders are being reckless, selfish, and short-sighted about demanding their right to congregate en masse and in close quarters (along with knowingly and willfully breaking local health regulations if need be), despite the risk and despite the proliferation of live streaming options.

But they're pro-life...don't forget that!