Atwater declares itself 'sanctuary city for business, ALLOWS OWNERS TO OPEN

[eagle1462010]

this is in the People's Republic of Kalifornia, battle lines continue to be drawn

Atwater declares itself 'sanctuary city' for business, allows owners to open | abc30.com

ATWATER, Calif. (KFSN) -- The City of Atwater has declared itself a "sanctuary city" for all businesses, allowing owners to open despite the state of California's stay-at-home order amid the coronavirus pandemic.

The Atwater City Council voted on the resolution on Friday afternoon, saying it, "Affirms the city's commitment to fundamental constitutional rights."

"This is America. You have the choice. It's time for the government to stop dictating another month, another three months, six months," said Atwater Mayor Paul Creighton. "When is it going to end? When everyone is bankrupt?"

Non-profit organizations, such as churches, are also allowed to reopen under the new resolution.

So..the larger picture...22 counties are reopening with the Gov.'s blessing..Merced not being one of those....
From your link:

With Friday's decision, Atwater says that businesses within its city limits have the right to open, but that doesn't mean everyone will exercise that right.
A significant complication: the protections are only at the city level. Businesses regulated by the state, including bars, nail and hair salons, could lose their licenses for opening, so many may choose to wait it out.

"We're not looking to jeopardize anyone's business. That's a license you hold with the state of California. So, we don't want to cause any harm there, use your best judgment," Mayor Creighton said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last week that the state had moved into the beginnings of the second stage of opening, allowing for low-risk non-essential businesses to resume operations.
RELATED: 22 counties in California given green light to reopen schools, restaurants and malls
Counties that feel their area is ahead of California's curve are required to meet certain guidelines to move further into Phase 2. Merced County is not one of the counties approved to do so.
The sanctuary city doesn't limit its protections for local businesses; non profits like churches can open their doors as well.

Victory Baptist church pastor Richard Miller says outdoor services will take place this Sunday. He moved his services online at the onset of Coronavirus.
"It's actually helped us to be more educated on how to keep things clean and reach out to people who can't make it out to church," Miller said.
That education brings modifications like reserved seating, taking someone's temperature upon arrival, and face masks if needed.

ALL BUSINESS should flee the state.............like most have already ........and leave California to it's bankrupt Status as it deserves..........maybe a earthquake will do this country a favor one day.

 

[wamose]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

There's a world of difference between granting our constitution sanctuary and giving illegal aliens sanctuary.

 

[Maxdeath]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

You mean other then federal law?

Ah....you pick and choose eh?

Yes I pick federal laws every time.
If a federal law says that it is illegal then it is illegal.

 

[iceberg]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

Laws........violating the constitution........

Show me the Sanctuary laws that do the same.

Your side started this shit..............time for a damned taste of your own medicine.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

Laws........violating the constitution........

Show me the Sanctuary laws that do the same.

Your side started this shit..............time for a damned taste of your own medicine.

I don’t care who started it. And I don’t much care who does it.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

Laws........violating the constitution........

Show me the Sanctuary laws that do the same.

Your side started this shit..............time for a damned taste of your own medicine.

I don’t care who started it. And I don’t much care who does it.

sure you do.............Sanctuary cities and illegals violate the laws............and it is entirely different when gov't shuts down people's means to make a living and feed their kids...........

Your side picks and chooses already and you have the nerve to get angry when PEOPLE DON'T OBEY YOU.

TOUGH TITTY.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

More stinking FEAR MONGERING..........

From a virus with a dang 0.2% rate after all the BS is dismissed and real data comes in.

Destroy our country for that BS.............

pfft.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Except guns and businesses are legal ... illegal immigrants are, by definition, not.

Sort of.

Supreme court has long held up the state’s ability to reasonably restrict firearms as well as it’s ability to impose temporary public health measures. In addition, some business’ are illegal.

You want to pick and choose what laws are “ok” based on personal preference. I don’t necessarily disagree, but you sound more like an anti authority leftist than a pro law rightist.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

More stinking FEAR MONGERING..........

From a virus with a dang 0.2% rate after all the BS is dismissed and real data comes in.

Destroy our country for that BS.............

pfft.

Unlike you, I am not a expert in this virus.

I do not know what the best course of action is in balancing economy vs. public health.

Glad to know you have all the answers.

 

[iceberg]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

No, probably not. I do not have a problem with people leaving water for illegal immigrants in the desert. I have no idea where you stand on it, what laws you consider just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional.

But when people argue that sanctuary cities for illegal immigrant but support same for guns and Covid...they have lost their legitimacy, in my view to criticize by choosing a cafeteria model.

 

[iceberg]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

No, probably not. I do not have a problem with people leaving water for illegal immigrants in the desert. I have no idea where you stand on it, what laws you consider just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional.

But when people argue that sanctuary cities for illegal immigrant but support same for guns and Covid...they have lost their legitimacy, in my view to criticize by choosing a cafeteria model.

What does, leaving them water and being humane have to do with them coming here illegally? Of course I would help them if needed so the slam on my morality is a bullshit extreme emotional ploy to portray me as evil, you good.

Gets old.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

No, probably not. I do not have a problem with people leaving water for illegal immigrants in the desert. I have no idea where you stand on it, what laws you consider just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional.

But when people argue that sanctuary cities for illegal immigrant but support same for guns and Covid...they have lost their legitimacy, in my view to criticize by choosing a cafeteria model.

What does, leaving them water and being humane have to do with them coming here illegally? Of course I would help them if needed so the slam on my morality is a bullshit extreme emotional ploy to portray me as evil, you good.

Gets old.

Oh for Gods sakes. First you take an indirect slam at my morality. So I carefuly, so as not to make wrong assumptions about you, state that that I do not know where you are on these issues, and you still go off.

The leaving them water comment was in relation to case that was in the news last year.

Man who faces 20 years in prison for ‘giving migrants food and water’ sees case end in mistrial

Conference in July will decide how to proceed after hung jury fails to determine ‘humanitarian’ geography teacher’s guilt

www.independent.co.uk

Extending 'Zero Tolerance' To People Who Help Migrants Along The Border

Scott Warren of the humanitarian group 'No More Deaths' faces three felony counts for harboring migrants. The number of U.S. citizens arrested for harboring is on the rise.

www.npr.org

 

[iceberg]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

No, probably not. I do not have a problem with people leaving water for illegal immigrants in the desert. I have no idea where you stand on it, what laws you consider just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional.

But when people argue that sanctuary cities for illegal immigrant but support same for guns and Covid...they have lost their legitimacy, in my view to criticize by choosing a cafeteria model.

What does, leaving them water and being humane have to do with them coming here illegally? Of course I would help them if needed so the slam on my morality is a bullshit extreme emotional ploy to portray me as evil, you good.

Gets old.

Oh for Gods sakes. First you take an indirect slam at my morality. So I carefuly, so as not to make wrong assumptions about you, state that that I do not know where you are on these issues, and you still go off.

The leaving them water comment was in relation to case that was in the news last year.

Man who faces 20 years in prison for ‘giving migrants food and water’ sees case end in mistrial

Conference in July will decide how to proceed after hung jury fails to determine ‘humanitarian’ geography teacher’s guilt

www.independent.co.uk

Extending 'Zero Tolerance' To People Who Help Migrants Along The Border

Scott Warren of the humanitarian group 'No More Deaths' faces three felony counts for harboring migrants. The number of U.S. citizens arrested for harboring is on the rise.

www.npr.org

I never said a thing about your morality. Or are you saying I am not usually direct? No one has ever told me that one before.

And asking you to stop attacking my morality is not going off.

You've seen me go off. That wasn't it.

You have a bad habit of extremifying everything.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yea, but what about...

In any event, there's a huge difference between wanting your legal business to reopen vs coming here illegally and demanding the same rights.

Feel free to try that in any other country.

No difference. You are choosing to break a law because you personally feel it is wrong. No different than sanctuary cities or people who leave water for migrants in tbe desert.

And...keep in mind. Opening up business too soon runs a risk of another surge in the epidemic so, arguably you are putting people’s lives at risk by selectively choosing to break this law.

You pretty much lost your moral high road over sanctuary cities.

We don't share the same morality so please stop pushing everything to an extreme stance.

No, probably not. I do not have a problem with people leaving water for illegal immigrants in the desert. I have no idea where you stand on it, what laws you consider just or unjust, constitutional or unconstitutional.

But when people argue that sanctuary cities for illegal immigrant but support same for guns and Covid...they have lost their legitimacy, in my view to criticize by choosing a cafeteria model.

What does, leaving them water and being humane have to do with them coming here illegally? Of course I would help them if needed so the slam on my morality is a bullshit extreme emotional ploy to portray me as evil, you good.

Gets old.

Oh for Gods sakes. First you take an indirect slam at my morality. So I carefuly, so as not to make wrong assumptions about you, state that that I do not know where you are on these issues, and you still go off.

The leaving them water comment was in relation to case that was in the news last year.

Man who faces 20 years in prison for ‘giving migrants food and water’ sees case end in mistrial

Conference in July will decide how to proceed after hung jury fails to determine ‘humanitarian’ geography teacher’s guilt

www.independent.co.uk

Extending 'Zero Tolerance' To People Who Help Migrants Along The Border

Scott Warren of the humanitarian group 'No More Deaths' faces three felony counts for harboring migrants. The number of U.S. citizens arrested for harboring is on the rise.

www.npr.org

I never said a thing about your morality. Or are you saying I am not usually direct? No one has ever told me that one before.

And asking you to stop attacking my morality is not going off.

You've seen me go off. That wasn't it.

You have a bad habit of extremifying everything.

Again...you are taking it all wrong. I didn’t attack your morality. I said I don’t know so as to AVOID setting you off on another round of “you are making assumptions about me”.

Honestly debating with you consistently takes this bizarro personal turn I don’t encounter elsewhere.

You state - we don’t share the same morality (whatever that means)
I state - I won’t make assumptions about your morality.

Now, I did post articles about tbe law being broken. What are your thoughts on that?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

You're wrong, and you know it.

 

[Coyote]

Well ... if you support “sanctuary” designations for this and for firearms you have no right to complain about the same for immigrants.

Yes, we do. One is American citizens exercising their rights against a would-be ruler. The other is giving quarter to illegal invaders.

Translation: it is ok to break the law if it is for my cause.

You're wrong, and you know it.

Not at all. You guys, after all are the ones who insist laws must be obeyed.