We Have the Right to Assemble and Freedom of Religion - Unlawful Arrest of Preacher

SweetSue92

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
10,776
Reaction score
3,554
Points
360
Location
USA
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
44,582
Reaction score
7,279
Points
1,830
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.

I'd like to see Congress assemble more using modern communications technology, staying in their district most of the year. Change the rules to make it legit.

I thought that more before this virus, in order to inoculate them from the toxic DC culture, not just this pandemic.
I don't disagree, and it's entirely possible this may produce that result when things settle down some.
 

SweetSue92

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
10,776
Reaction score
3,554
Points
360
Location
USA
People don’t like Nazis being brought up and I think it is first time I have but did not the beginning of them rounding people up start over health issues?
It's just a battle cry: OMG YOU SAID NAZIS I"M SO OFFENDED WE'RE NOT PUTTING PEOPLE IN GAS CHAMBERS
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
44,582
Reaction score
7,279
Points
1,830
Looks like some of our government officials haven't read the Constitution.

---Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne was charged with misdemeanor counts of unlawful assembly---

Public safety, kid. Emergency measures and all that.
Country based on individual liberty, and freedom of religion and all that.

Granted, I think the idiot should have stayed home.... but the fact is, we are country based on freedom and liberty. Sorry, but you don't get to just make us your slaves because you want to. By all means, convince, argue, and encourage. But no, we are a free people. Period.
Sorry you don't get to knowingly endanger people.
Then stop driving cars, which is a known danger.

Do not EVER eat peanuts or tree nuts in public places again, a known danger for the food allergic.

Or wear fragrances. A danger for asthmatics.

Gosh, so many dangers you need to avoid, thumb sucker
You are not even remotely making a relevant or valid analogy here. Crowding together during a pandemic of a respiratory virus is NOT the same as everyday life risks, not even close. It's far more akin to texting while driving, or even driving drunk. I'm assuming that you don't do either of those, regardless of your constant cries of "don't let fear rule your life!"
Sure it is. You don't want those churches meeting even if they assure no one has a fever, they are employing social distancing, and everyone must use hand sanitizer--right? In other words, you want their freedoms taken no matter what. For "safety".
Excuse me? Did you just tell me what you ASSume I want and don't want? Based on what, precisely? A reasoned consideration of who you're talking to, what I'm saying, and the many, many debates in which we have been allies? Or the kneejerk decision that "Disagreement = You're a LEFTIST! Bring on the stock insults!"?

I notice that you read and answered only the first sentence and utterly ignored the rest of the post. Tell me, are you really proud of how "rational" and "reasoned" you're being in this thread?
 

SweetSue92

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
10,776
Reaction score
3,554
Points
360
Location
USA
Looks like some of our government officials haven't read the Constitution.

---Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne was charged with misdemeanor counts of unlawful assembly---

Public safety, kid. Emergency measures and all that.
Country based on individual liberty, and freedom of religion and all that.

Granted, I think the idiot should have stayed home.... but the fact is, we are country based on freedom and liberty. Sorry, but you don't get to just make us your slaves because you want to. By all means, convince, argue, and encourage. But no, we are a free people. Period.
Sorry you don't get to knowingly endanger people.
Then stop driving cars, which is a known danger.

Do not EVER eat peanuts or tree nuts in public places again, a known danger for the food allergic.

Or wear fragrances. A danger for asthmatics.

Gosh, so many dangers you need to avoid, thumb sucker
You are not even remotely making a relevant or valid analogy here. Crowding together during a pandemic of a respiratory virus is NOT the same as everyday life risks, not even close. It's far more akin to texting while driving, or even driving drunk. I'm assuming that you don't do either of those, regardless of your constant cries of "don't let fear rule your life!"
Sure it is. You don't want those churches meeting even if they assure no one has a fever, they are employing social distancing, and everyone must use hand sanitizer--right? In other words, you want their freedoms taken no matter what. For "safety".
Excuse me? Did you just tell me what you ASSume I want and don't want? Based on what, precisely? A reasoned consideration of who you're talking to, what I'm saying, and the many, many debates in which we have been allies? Or the kneejerk decision that "Disagreement = You're a LEFTIST! Bring on the stock insults!"?

I notice that you read and answered only the first sentence and utterly ignored the rest of the post. Tell me, are you really proud of how "rational" and "reasoned" you're being in this thread?
Are you going to address any of my points or not?
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
24,769
Reaction score
2,484
Points
290
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
This isn't a nut allergy where people are entirely capable of safeguarding what they put in their own mouths. This is a pandemic spread in the air where one person can infect an untold number of other people in a crowd.

Nobody is micromanaging anyone's religion, it has zero to do with religion at all.
 

SweetSue92

Platinum Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2018
Messages
10,776
Reaction score
3,554
Points
360
Location
USA
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
This isn't a nut allergy where people are entirely capable of safeguarding what they put in their own mouths. This is a pandemic spread in the air where one person can infect an untold number of other people in a crowd.

Nobody is micromanaging anyone's religion, it has zero to do with religion at all.
1. No they're not, there's a lot of cross-contamination obviously. Besides, the argument has been stated in this thread over and over: safety, responsibility to others; etc. So this is easy. Ban peanuts and tree nuts. Or wait, is it just a smaller number of people so who cares if they die?

2. This has everything to do with religion. Meeting for a concert, a game, a party is not enshrined in the Bill of Rights. But meeting for worship is.
 

Siete

Platinum Member
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
34,325
Reaction score
3,965
Points
1,130
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
This isn't a nut allergy where people are entirely capable of safeguarding what they put in their own mouths. This is a pandemic spread in the air where one person can infect an untold number of other people in a crowd.

Nobody is micromanaging anyone's religion, it has zero to do with religion at all.
it has everything to do with nuts - these morons are F'N NUTS !
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
44,582
Reaction score
7,279
Points
1,830
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
And if they could "feel it's worth it" without risking anyone but themselves, that would be relevant. But they don't get to "feel it's worth it" when the "it" in question is someone ELSE'S health and safety.

Most people who eat tree nuts know there are people in the world who are severely allergic, and so they make what concessions they need to, however inconvenient, to accommodate that. Likewise, most people who get in a car know there's a degree of risk involved, and so they accept the imposition of prudent traffic laws to mitigate that. We can't demand unlimited freedoms without consideration of the freedoms of others; that's what living in a society MEANS.

And I'm tired unto death of you waving the flag in my face and screaming, "My rights! My rights!" and never, EVER addressing the inarguable fact that I HAVE RIGHTS, TOO. It's not all about you, however self-absorbed you are. I have a right not to have my safety excessively endangered because YOU have decided that it's an "outrage" for your freedom to be "infringed" by an expectation of basic responsibility to others.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
24,769
Reaction score
2,484
Points
290
Right now, guidelines call for social distancing in the population however, the congress can assemble. I guess they are more 'special.'
Congress is classified as "essential government services". They're also assembling as little as humanly possible.

Congress people are significantly more susceptible to COVID 19 than other Americans. At least 5 members- 1%- have already contracted it. A significantly greater portion than the general public.
True, which is why they're assembling as little as they can manage. Nevertheless, they have a clear and specific duty in this situation, and if they're not prepared to take some risk to fulfill their duty to the American people, then they need to get the fuck out of office.
These people of deep faith feel they are taking a risk too, and they feel it's worth it. I'm a Christian and I'm not doing it--my church is meeting virtually. But I'm not going to police and shame and micromanage other people's faith (I do draw the line at actively sick people going to church though).

Most people who eat peanuts/tree nuts KNOW there are people in the world who are severely allergic, but they still eat them. Most people who get in a car KNOW they could kill or get killed, no matter if they follow every rule or not. We can't take people's Bill of Rights freedoms away just because there might be some risk. It is just then than we must be even more careful than ever. History should prove that more than anything.
This isn't a nut allergy where people are entirely capable of safeguarding what they put in their own mouths. This is a pandemic spread in the air where one person can infect an untold number of other people in a crowd.

Nobody is micromanaging anyone's religion, it has zero to do with religion at all.
1. No they're not, there's a lot of cross-contamination obviously. Besides, the argument has been stated in this thread over and over: safety, responsibility to others; etc. So this is easy. Ban peanuts and tree nuts. Or wait, is it just a smaller number of people so who cares if they die?
It is a smaller number of people and peanut allergies aren't contagious. So in those cases someone with a peanut allergy cannot harm others therefore the better option to ensure the safety of the person with a peanut allergy is to curb their behavior rather than everyone else.

2. This has everything to do with religion. Meeting for a concert, a game, a party is not enshrined in the Bill of Rights. But meeting for worship is.
No, the state has no obligation to ensure you can go to church if that means you would be breaking the law when others can't attend other events. Like everything else there are online options.
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
44,582
Reaction score
7,279
Points
1,830
People don’t like Nazis being brought up and I think it is first time I have but did not the beginning of them rounding people up start over health issues?
It's just a battle cry: OMG YOU SAID NAZIS I"M SO OFFENDED WE'RE NOT PUTTING PEOPLE IN GAS CHAMBERS
You want to talk about "just a battle cry", how about, "I don't like this! It's JUST LIKE THE NAZIS!"?
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,297
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
Why should those rights supersede others rights to life?
Mainly because the premise that allowing people to exercise their explicitly-asserted First Amendment rights violates anyone else's right to life is a flat-out lie, and those of you telling it know damn well that you are lying.
Nope, it's not a lie. Congregating in large numbers increasing the spread of COVID-19. Not just among church-goers, but among those with whom they come in contact. That selfishly puts others lives in peril and unfortunately for some, brutally strips away their right to life.

Your pathetically weak excuse fails to justify placing the right to assemble above the right to life.
That is the legal/constitutional justification. There's no social need to ban snake handling, or even peyote use, if it's central to the exercise of religion, because no one besides the faithful are impacted. But the virus WILL WITHOUT ANY QUESTION spread outside of just the people assembling in some religious setting, because the faithful will not remain quarantined inside the locale of the religious setting.

So, if someone want to assert the regulation goes too far in banning the assembly altogether, they have to address how the exponential rise in sick people is not affected.
And in a totally selfish vein, those who continue to disregard the social distancing orders prolong this goddamned shutdown and the ever tightening stay-at-home orders that are completely fucking up our lives.
if all 50 states go into shelter in place mode, scientists are predicting that our best outcome will be 100,000 - 240,000,000 dead. that is the benchmark we hope to meet. but it's not looking like the troglodyte states are jumping on board; so the toll might be higher. i hope & pray (in my house where i know god can hear me) that scientific models have it wrong.

Actually, you got this half assed backwards. The most affected states are cess pools like New York, owned and operated by the Far Left.


Not in so called "troglodyte states".


Libs have disregarded our President's suggestion for citizens to wash their hands, figuring they are "fucking up Trump's program" by their refusals.
tick toc, trog ... tic toc.
It's happening now, Mississippi has the largest COVID-19 hospitalization rate.


Oklahoma and South Carolina round out the top 3.

Mississippi has 1100 cases of Kung Flu. New York has 84000.


BTW, Louisiana is adjacent to Mississippi but is run by a Hardcore leftist, and has more than 5 times as many cases as Mississippi
It has nothing to do with politics. Mississippi doesn't have Mardi Gras.
Actually they do, though nothing near the scale of N'awlins. So does Mobile Alabama.

And Louisiana is in no way run by a "hardcore leftist". The moron poster couldn't even name him if we gave him twelve computers all tuned to The Googles.
 

Bob Blaylock

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,710
Reaction score
3,505
Points
290
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
But you are correct about De Blasio. That dimwits drunk on power.
And it's compliant, useful idiots such as yourself who allow dimwits like him to get away with seizing that power in the first place, and hanging on to it.

Tyrants come to power on a wave of slogan-shouting emotional hotheads such as yourself.
No, they come to power because cowards such as yourself roll over and let them get away with it.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,297
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
Looks like some of our government officials haven't read the Constitution.

---Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne was charged with misdemeanor counts of unlawful assembly---

Public safety, kid. Emergency measures and all that.
Country based on individual liberty, and freedom of religion and all that.

Granted, I think the idiot should have stayed home.... but the fact is, we are country based on freedom and liberty. Sorry, but you don't get to just make us your slaves because you want to. By all means, convince, argue, and encourage. But no, we are a free people. Period.
Sorry you don't get to knowingly endanger people.
Constitution my friend. Sorry, you don't get to just take away constitutional rights.

How many more will be endangered by a civil war? Make Corona look like a Utopia.
So you get to infringe on my civil rights because you think your rights are unlimited? I don't think so.
You get to listen to your local and state authorities and stay the fuck away from groups.
Hey, Chuckles, if you can't be bothered to read and remember the thread so you know who's actually arguing what, then don't presume to the privilege of addressing me.

Either apologize for your vastly incorrect kneejerk assumption, or fuck off. Or both.

Yep, I deserved that, read your post wrong.
Accepted. It's weird enough for both of us to agree on something. Kinda icky.
Exactly the same feeling you and I both noted when we were both denouncing the orange babyman.
Member that?
 

Siete

Platinum Member
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
34,325
Reaction score
3,965
Points
1,130
how can the preacher make people walk again if its done online

1585857199309.png


SUCKERS
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
33,429
Reaction score
3,479
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
The right to assemble is already regulated for safety with requirements for permits.

The right to worship is already regulated also for safety by limits of how many people can be in particular buildings, fire codes and water and sanitation in waste removal and food.

So, complaints about limiting church services cannot honestly be grounded on concerns that govt is infringing by placing safety limits. Rather the arguments are really about whether the govt's power can go as far as totally shutting down any religious service to groups of say more than ten. That is there's no basis to argue govt cannot limit rights on the need for safety, but rather how far can the govt go.
Pretty much, that's correct. The government is not telling them what to believe or how to practice it; they're just telling them how many people can be present while doing so.
jmo, but it might help if religious groups were given some assistance in access to social media. The guy in LA who wouldn't shut it down said he needed to literally lay hands on his congregation. There's no compromise there, unless the govt want so declare that a vital function exception to say in place.
The guy in LA is a moron, AND he doesn't know his theology very well. As if God can't hear and answer your prayer without a specific ritual attached to it. Is he praying, or doing a magic spell?
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
33,429
Reaction score
3,479
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
The right to assemble is already regulated for safety with requirements for permits.

The right to worship is already regulated also for safety by limits of how many people can be in particular buildings, fire codes and water and sanitation in waste removal and food.

So, complaints about limiting church services cannot honestly be grounded on concerns that govt is infringing by placing safety limits. Rather the arguments are really about whether the govt's power can go as far as totally shutting down any religious service to groups of say more than ten. That is there's no basis to argue govt cannot limit rights on the need for safety, but rather how far can the govt go.
Pretty much, that's correct. The government is not telling them what to believe or how to practice it; they're just telling them how many people can be present while doing so.
jmo, but it might help if religious groups were given some assistance in access to social media. The guy in LA who wouldn't shut it down said he needed to literally lay hands on his congregation. There's no compromise there, unless the govt want so declare that a vital function exception to say in place.
The guy in LA is a moron, AND he doesn't know his theology very well. As if God can't hear and answer your prayer without a specific ritual attached to it. Is he praying, or doing a magic spell?
I think he's nuts, but I do see his point about "laying on of hands." But as an Episcopalian I am uncomfortable with any touching or show of emotion. LOL It's just about what we've discussed. I actually do feel and emotional need to attend a eucharist service and attend my church book club, although the book they were studying is not really relevant, imo, to the times. But we have maybe two more weeks to make this "event" as little life changing as possible. No one is asked to give up God over this.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,297
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
Looks like some of our government officials haven't read the Constitution.

---Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne was charged with misdemeanor counts of unlawful assembly---

There are exceptions.


Will they make exceptions for the Radical Muslims in a few weeks when their annual Ramadam bullshit comes down?
Of course the exceptions don't apply to Muslims. Why that would be wacist.
Oh they never do, never. Muslims are brown-skinned, they're "diverse" and wear cool clothing.

That's all it takes for most simpleton Leftists to drool all over them.
Did you actually just sit on this board and post "Muslims are brown-skinned"????

:laughing0301:
:laugh2: :lmao:
:auiqs.jpg:


Wait wait --- and then immediately follow that sweeping non sequitur generalization with "they're diverse"??

Holy SHIT that just took over first place for stupidest post in recent memory.
Oh no, I gotta bookmark this shit.Ho
You entirely missed that I'm citing reasons WHY BRAIN-DEAD LEFTIST LOVE MUSLIMS but go ahead Pogo knock yourself out
I don't know anyone who is 'brain dead' but as a 'leftist' I no more love or hate Muslims than I do Christians or Jews.

And I expect Americans- regardless of whether they are Muslim, Jewish or Christian or atheists to follow the law and do what they can to protect everyone.
That's what all the Nazis said at the Nuremburg Trials--they were just "following the law", just following orders

The law, "orders" should be questioned. Does anyone at all remember when so-called liberals weren't mindless drones just following whatever orders are handed down?
How can you possibly compare our social distancing Orders to Nazis who systematically gassed/worked to death millions of people they didn't like?
That's going to far, in my book.

Kind of an understatement, no?
I'm trying not to be arrogant, condescending, annoying and insensitive to others' feelings. And I see I used the wrong too. Gotta run.

They don't care.
You got any more uplifting messages for me? I'm about on the edge of a breakdown as it is.
Hey, sorry about that. I'm on edge too.

I don't have comforting words, I'm worried and that is an understatement. I'm also pissed off, disturbed and disappointed by what I see on this board.
Sorry, Happy Joy. Most of the folks here "get it." A lot of the ones who argue against the principle of being forced to be safe--like Sweet Sue--are actually following social distancing orders.

We'll come through it. ALTHOUGH MY BEAUTICIAN is closed at least until the end of April and that's gonna get ugly.
You want ugly? Half the vape shops in town have shut down completely, and the others have reduced hours and only allow one or two customers in at a time. There are going to be a lot of nicotine-deprived, bad-tempered people running around, and a lot more who go back to tobacco . . . which makes them more vulnerable to coronavirus, plus putting them at risk for cancer.

Here in Pennsylvania they sell juul and other vape crap at Sheetz and other convenience type stores which are open.
Just curious. Are they liquor stores open in Penn?
Closed the state owned brick and mortar liquor stores, but you can buy booze online.

In addition, beer stores are considered life sustaining, and were never closed.
OK, interesting. Well, glad you still have access, I consider it essential for mental health at this point.
Inasmuch as shelter-in-place, while it has curtailed most public crime, has at the same time spiked domestic violence, the availability of alcohol as a fuel for just that is kind of questionable.
 

Bob Blaylock

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,710
Reaction score
3,505
Points
290
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
But this current lockdown can't be open ended, we need to see a return to normalcy up ahead pretty soon. 30% unemployment is really bad news. They had it for many years in Detroit, take a look at that mess.
If this continues for very long, most of us won't need to go to places like Detroit to see it. Our own communities will look the same way.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,297
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
Looks like some of our government officials haven't read the Constitution.

---Pastor Rodney Howard-Browne was charged with misdemeanor counts of unlawful assembly---

There are exceptions.


Will they make exceptions for the Radical Muslims in a few weeks when their annual Ramadam bullshit comes down?
Of course the exceptions don't apply to Muslims. Why that would be wacist.
Oh they never do, never. Muslims are brown-skinned, they're "diverse" and wear cool clothing.

That's all it takes for most simpleton Leftists to drool all over them.
Did you actually just sit on this board and post "Muslims are brown-skinned"????

:laughing0301:
:laugh2: :lmao:
:auiqs.jpg:


Wait wait --- and then immediately follow that sweeping non sequitur generalization with "they're diverse"??

Holy SHIT that just took over first place for stupidest post in recent memory.
Oh no, I gotta bookmark this shit.
You entirely missed that I'm citing reasons WHY BRAIN-DEAD LEFTIST LOVE MUSLIMS but go ahead Pogo knock yourself out
I don't know anyone who is 'brain dead' but as a 'leftist' I no more love or hate Muslims than I do Christians or Jews.

And I expect Americans- regardless of whether they are Muslim, Jewish or Christian or atheists to follow the law and do what they can to protect everyone.
That's what all the Nazis said at the Nuremburg Trials--they were just "following the law", just following orders

The law, "orders" should be questioned. Does anyone at all remember when so-called liberals weren't mindless drones just following whatever orders are handed down?
First we have "ohmigod, it's SLAVERY to expect us to be inconvenienced!" Now we have "ohmigod, it's just like the NAZIS to expect us to be inconvenienced!" Should we cue the fainting couch and smelling salts? 'Cause this level of hysterical melodrama is positively Victorian.
That's a lot of hyperbole coming from you.

The Nazis cited the the law when they were asked to give account: "I was just following the law". I'm saying the law isn't always right. I mean let's look at these shutdown orders now. We don't really even know if what we're doing is right or wise, for pity's sake. It's certainly crashing our economy. But aside from that, even if it IS wise, people still have the Constitutional right to gather for worship.

You do remember the Bill of Rights, correct?
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.

Check me.
 

New Posts

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top