Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
jjptkd

Covid-19 and Freedom of Assembly, etc.

Recommended Posts

On 9/11/2020 at 7:24 PM, dtel said:

Just call it a peaceful protest, seems to be no problem with those ?

 

Just open it all back up, we have people to spare, loose a few here and there.

 

It’s sad to see our neighbour turning into one of those countries that used to be warned against, the kind of place where life is cheap and people won’t be missed if they disappear.  Equally sadly, parts of Canada are like that, too, especially for Native people.

 

The World is actually getting better, but it’s doing it so achingly slowly, and now the news industry lets us hear about terrible things that happen everyday, which makes it look like it’s getting worse.  It’s not.  Most of us just didn’t know how bad things already were.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CECAA850 said:

The problem is they're picking and choosing what's ok and what's not based on agendas and not safety.  Peaceful protests of hundreds are ok while peaceful worship is not.  Government employees have access to gyms and the general public does not.  A liquor store is an essential business?  

 

South Africa banned liquor sales for several months, earlier this year, in an effort to reduce community transmission of COVID-19.  Things got better, and the ban was lifted recently.  What had been a relatively quiet time came to an end, with a sudden surge in car and bike crashes, domestic violence, and crime surpassing previous levels.  It seems there was a pent-up demand for the liquor, if not for all the problems that come with it.

 

There was a fear that if the ban continued, alcohol production and consumption would be driven underground, with all the problems that would bring, like poisoning from bootleg liquor and crime from competing criminal groups.  The alcoholic genie can not be put back into the bottle, it seems.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Islander said:

 

South Africa banned liquor sales for several months, earlier this year, in an effort to reduce community transmission of COVID-19.  Things got better, and the ban was lifted recently.  What had been a relatively quiet time came to an end, with a sudden surge in car and bike crashes, domestic violence, and crime surpassing previous levels.  It seems there was a pent-up demand for the liquor, if not for all the problems that come with it.

 

There was a fear that if the ban continued, alcohol production and consumption would be driven underground, with all the problems that would bring, like poisoning from bootleg liquor and crime from competing criminal groups.  The alcoholic genie can not be put back into the bottle, it seems.

So liquor stores remain open for our own good.  Lol.  Ill drink to that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mungkiman said:

A County Commissioner issued FB post about the possibility of Civil War should be your first clue...

 


Of? What? This same scenario played out daily in a dozen cities across the country? The “news” wouldn’t lie about these “peaceful” 

protests now would they? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2020 at 10:09 PM, Jeff Matthews said:

It was one of the few channels we had.  2, 8, 11, 13, 26 and 39.

That had to be Houston.  We had those same channels.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shear fact that these "groups" are actually able to destroy and shut down towns, cities and other communities is the most scary of all of this for me. Hey, its a great thing the majority of the US has to get up and go to work.  Think about these events on a 10X and 20X scale, now that's kind of frightening.  I cant help but think of what might be in the cards election night too. 

 

 Well, the supply Preppers gained a little respect this year and the ET community were thrown a bone from the Naval video's. We have been introduced to modern day Zombies that are completely consumed with social networking and all that is just dark hate.  They're stealing the comfort of Peace, Freedom and Liberty from us all and its looking like this is exactly what a few large, broke areas of country want.   

 

Maybe all of this needs to happen for us to get where we need to be? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dave A said:

Why shouldn't one group be met with enforcers of laws since they are breaking laws?

It does seem that if these people were to watch Tombstone, they would be calling the Marshals the bad guys and the outlaws the victims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2020 at 12:01 PM, jjptkd said:

If we give up our rights so easily every time there's a man made "pandemic" we are no longer a free people period that's it the dream is over might as well learn to speak Chinese.

Split from Covid Vanished Thread to keep that on track. Hopefully this thread will last

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2020 at 10:01 AM, jjptkd said:

If we give up our rights so easily every time there's a man made "pandemic" we are no longer a free people period that's it the dream is over might as well learn to speak Chinese.

 

Link?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Seadog said:

That had to be Houston.  We had those same channels.

We just had 3 for as long as I remember while growing up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My grandparents had only 1.

If you lived at a high enough elevation you might be able to pick up another station or two but nobody had good picture quality,   Needless to say TV wasn't a big deal deal down in those hills there never was much interesting on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dwilawyer said:

A basic article from National Law Journal, a couple of months old, but discussing the 9th Cir. Case and the 6th Cir. Cases.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.natlawreview.com/article/judicial-restraint-time-covid-19%3Famp

From this article, I haven't had a chance to review the opinions yet.

 

"Across the nation, religious institutions are challenging COVID-19-related restrictions on religious worship.  There are too many cases to note.  We recently posted about the U.S. Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) decision denying an application for injunctive relief filed by South Bay United Pentecostal Church challenging California Governor Gavin Newsom’s Stay-At-Home order and 4-stage reopening plan which restricted religious worship gatherings.  We also posted about district court cases from Kentucky and North Carolina where executive orders in those states were found to violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. On May 30, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in a one-line order, upheld a decision by the District Court for the District of Delaware that declined a church’s request for a temporary restraining order against enforcement of Delaware Governor John Carney’s COVID-19 emergency orders.

Earlier this month, while evaluating Kentucky Governor Beshear’s COVID-19 executive orders, the Sixth Circuit answered several lower courts’ direct pleas to resolve “the constitutionality of these governmental actions … at the appellate level,” in Roberts v. Neace. (A week prior to the decision in Neace, the Sixth Circuit applied Kentucky’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act in Maryville Baptist Church, Inc. v. Beshear, to enjoin enforcement of the Governor’s orders in a manner that would ban drive-in worship services.) The court reviewed two orders, the first of which prohibited all mass gatherings “including, but not limited to, community, civic, public, leisure, faith-based, or sporting events.” The second order permitted “life-sustaining” businesses to operate within the state but did not count religious services as “life-sustaining.” The court in this case issued an injunction against the Governor’s order after finding that the order was not neutral and generally applicable.  “As a rule of thumb,” the court reasoned, “the more exceptions to a prohibition, the less likely it will count as a generally applicable, nondiscriminatory law.”  Businesses permitted to operate as “life-sustaining” included law firms, laundromats, liquor stores, gun shops, airlines, mining-operations, funeral homes, and landscaping businesses if social-distancing and other health related precautions were followed.  Since the orders were not neutral and generally applicable, they were subject to “strict scrutiny” review. Although the Sixth Circuit found that the Governor’s orders were supported by a compelling interest, they were not narrowly tailored to control the spread of COVID-19. The orders could have instead limited the number of people who could attend services at one time.

So, we ask, after the SCOTUS South Bay case, are these district court and circuit court cases still “good law”? How can courts consider similar governmental orders that result in similar burdens to religious exercise, but arrive at such different results?

The answer might lie in Chief Justice John Robert’s philosophy of judicial restraint. He wrote in the South Bay majority opinion that “[t]he precise question of when restrictions on particular social activities should be lifted during the pandemic is a dynamic and fact-intensive matter subject to reasonable disagreement.” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

“[t]he precise question of when restrictions on particular social activities should be lifted during the pandemic is a dynamic and fact-intensive matter subject to reasonable disagreement.” 

What a crock.  It's a full on assault against churches.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

The answer might lie in Chief Justice John Robert’s philosophy of judicial restraint. He wrote in the South Bay majority opinion that “[t]he precise question of when restrictions on particular social activities should be lifted during the pandemic is a dynamic and fact-intensive matter subject to reasonable disagreement.” 

... meaning, "We will order what we want, when we want and how we want it."  (It certainly can't be a blanket assertion that government is limited in any broad respect.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:

What a crock.  It's a full on assault against churches.

It's an assertion of power so long as there is a reasonable basis.  Interestingly, when it comes to legislation, the Supreme Court's test is "rational basis," meaning even if reasonable minds would agree it's bad policy, as long as it is rational, it will stand.  Contrast this with the quote as it pertains to orders issued by governing officials.  Is this a requirement that the order be "reasonable?"  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jeff Matthews said:

as long as it is rational, it will stand.

In whose eyes?  What's the standard for having a reasonable mind?  Who determines that?  The standard is way too vague.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:

In whose eyes?  What's the standard for having a reasonable mind?  Who determines that?  The standard is way too vague.

"reasonable," "rational," "timely," "adequate," "prompt," "diligent..."  - they're all vague.  That's life.  We can't get by without vagaries; yet, somebody has to decide whether there is compliance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...