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

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
24,769
Reaction score
2,484
Points
290
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.
I'm more or less referring to my situation. I need my wine.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,299
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
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.
NO, IT IS NOT.
 

justinacolmena

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2017
Messages
1,248
Reaction score
155
Points
130
Location
alaska, usa
Arizona has a lot of wild life that's good for hunting, actually. Elk, antelope, javelina, and wild turkeys, among other things.
You HUNT in a mental health state? You mean they haven't put you away for being mentally insane or picked you up for littering or something and decided you were mentally incompetent to stand trial?

Can you even possess a BB gun or CO₂ pistol after you've been adjudicated as a mental defective in a court of law by a bunch of animal-loving ladies while the gentlemen of the court masturbate over the service of legal process?

That's the craziest thing I've ever heard iny life.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,299
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.
I'm more or less referring to my situation. I need my wine.
To be honest I don't know whether alcohol has been partially, fully or not at all curtailed here. It's not something I do. But where it is the case that alcohol stores are shuttered, I can see the argument that they're not essential.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
7,044
Reaction score
1,166
Points
195
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.
If I eat peanuts it won't affect you at all

And I never think I am going to die when I drive somewhere.

But once again there is nothing being done that is prohibiting anyone from practicing their religion. People can pray at home or they can pray in a chat room or video conference etc etc etc.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
7,044
Reaction score
1,166
Points
195
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.
Point of note the right of assembly is.

but no one has shown me anything that any religion requires you to congregate with hundreds of other people in a place of worship
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,299
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.
Point of note the right of assembly is.

but no one has shown me anything that any religion requires you to congregate with hundreds of other people in a place of worship
Exactly. Poster's trying to blame local health restrictions for her own failure to think.
 

Marion Morrison

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
54,556
Reaction score
11,641
Points
2,040
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.
But what about the millions that die afterwards from the Super-Depression that ensues?
You're right. Let's open up for business now. You think the virus is going away and the economy comes screaming back? You're not going to have an economy until this is under control.

If this last for a long time, we still won't have an economy. Right now, a lot of businesses , a lot of people are really struggling. I'm not personally. But those in retail trade, in hospitality, transportation, restaurants, pimpery and prostitution, are all being ruined and reduced to utter destitution.
I get that but you can't have an economy during wildly out of control pandemic. It's just not going to happen so we have no choice but to take care of one issue to a point where it is manageable and then go after the second otherwise neither gets fixed.
Get ready to starve, dumbass. Me? I can eat whatever. You? You're in for a rude awakening.
I'm not going hungry anytime soon. I can wait this out for years if need be.
Suure, buckwheat. With what? No guns?
I live in Arizona, who said anything about no guns?
What you gonna eat in Arizona? Cactus? Snakes?
Coyote? Don't eat Ms. Coyote, pls.
Aside from the cannibalism factor, I've grown rather fond over the years. That last unwarranted ban notwithstanding.
Oh, so you don't really know much about Arizona then.
Can't say I do. If you want info about FL, I'm your man.
I know there's no fishing in Arizona. Not like here, anyways.

Are you claiming you can catch Mackeral in Arizona?
 
Last edited:

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
3,594
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
Hey, pal. My older sister is 59, with serious asthma and a couple of other things that put her in the high-risk-of-death category for this thing. Without the coronavirus and with regular medication and doctor's visits, she's a vibrant, essential part of her family's lives and will be for at least 20 years yet.
For what it's worth, I'm “high-risk” too. I'm 57 years old, diabetic, and my health and immune system have been weakened rather badly by a bit over half a year of idleness since I broke my leg last September. I wouldn't think of demanding that other people give up their essential Constitutional rights, to protect me from a dubious risk of getting an infection that might threaten me more than it does them.

I will admit to some self-interest. I'[m not afraid of this Coronavirus. It's very likely that I've already been unavoidably exposed to it, and in spite of my immune weakness, it seems not to have taken root in me. My wife was sick for a few days, from what is very likely this virus, but it was very mild, compared to other flu-like illnesses that she routinely catches at the call center where she works, which seems to be somehow optimized for spreading contagious diseases among its workers. Tomorrow is the last day of her two-week quarantine.

But for me, the hysteria over this virus is certainly a much greater and more credible threat to my health and well-being than the virus itself ever could be, and I do not think I am alone in this. I'm at the point in recover from my injury where I really need to be getting and and engaging in work-like activities, instead of continuing to waste away at home, getting weaker and less healthy from inactivity. At this point, the longer I am out of work, the more my health and strength will deteriorate, and the longer it will take and the more difficult it will be to fully recover once I am working again.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
3,594
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
48,532
Reaction score
8,873
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
Are you a judge?
I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and I know the good pastor will get off after hiring a lawyer.
No, you don't. I ask again. Are you a judge?
Are you a leftist derpwad that knows nothing about The Constitution? I bet damn good and well you are.

Both sheriff's offices in both counties will have to answer for this egregious violation of The Constitution.
They did not say they could not assemble. They said you had to maintain 6 feet, which they did not do. Otherwise, those having "drive-in" church would get arrested also. They were not.

Exactly. The dude could have still held his services if he had decided to do a drive in church or held them outside in the open air with chairs 6 feet apart. But, he was too lazy to come up with a creative solution that would have worked and kept him from being arrested.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,299
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
WHAT'S THE VERB IN THAT PHRASE, DINGO??

"Gather to worship"

That's why it was in ITALICS, Dumbass.

:aug08_031:

THIS JUST IN -- worship does not require "gather" so spare us the persecution-complex Checkers Speeches.
 

Pogo

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2012
Messages
115,935
Reaction score
18,299
Points
2,190
Location
Fennario
Are you a judge?
I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and I know the good pastor will get off after hiring a lawyer.
No, you don't. I ask again. Are you a judge?
Are you a leftist derpwad that knows nothing about The Constitution? I bet damn good and well you are.

Both sheriff's offices in both counties will have to answer for this egregious violation of The Constitution.
They did not say they could not assemble. They said you had to maintain 6 feet, which they did not do. Otherwise, those having "drive-in" church would get arrested also. They were not.

Exactly. The dude could have still held his services if he had decided to do a drive in church or held them outside in the open air with chairs 6 feet apart. But, he was too lazy to come up with a creative solution that would have worked and kept him from being arrested.
I think of it less as "being lazy" than "being an attention whore asshole". It got him the publicity he desperately craves.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
7,044
Reaction score
1,166
Points
195
Are you a judge?
I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and I know the good pastor will get off after hiring a lawyer.
No, you don't. I ask again. Are you a judge?
Are you a leftist derpwad that knows nothing about The Constitution? I bet damn good and well you are.

Both sheriff's offices in both counties will have to answer for this egregious violation of The Constitution.
They did not say they could not assemble. They said you had to maintain 6 feet, which they did not do. Otherwise, those having "drive-in" church would get arrested also. They were not.

Exactly. The dude could have still held his services if he had decided to do a drive in church or held them outside in the open air with chairs 6 feet apart. But, he was too lazy to come up with a creative solution that would have worked and kept him from being arrested.
And the people of the church were too stupid to realize that their priest or whatever didn't give a shit about their health but I bet he made sure he separated his flock from their money
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
7,044
Reaction score
1,166
Points
195
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Maybe you can show me where in any religion that it is required to gather in a building in order to worship
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
44,828
Reaction score
7,426
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.
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.
This sort of "all or nothing" thinking is a hallmark of leftists and children. You should really reconsider it. I can't believe you really want to make the argument of "If life has risks, we should NEVER try to mitigate ANY risks at all!" but if that's the hill you want to die on, let me know and we'll do it, I guess.

Actually, meeting for concerts and games and parties IS enshrined in the Bill of Rights, in the same Amendment you're so assiduously trying to cloak yourself in. Maybe you should stop waving it at everyone for a moment and actually read it.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
48,532
Reaction score
8,873
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
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.
I'm more or less referring to my situation. I need my wine.
To be honest I don't know whether alcohol has been partially, fully or not at all curtailed here. It's not something I do. But where it is the case that alcohol stores are shuttered, I can see the argument that they're not essential.
Are you a judge?
I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, and I know the good pastor will get off after hiring a lawyer.
No, you don't. I ask again. Are you a judge?
Are you a leftist derpwad that knows nothing about The Constitution? I bet damn good and well you are.

Both sheriff's offices in both counties will have to answer for this egregious violation of The Constitution.
They did not say they could not assemble. They said you had to maintain 6 feet, which they did not do. Otherwise, those having "drive-in" church would get arrested also. They were not.

Exactly. The dude could have still held his services if he had decided to do a drive in church or held them outside in the open air with chairs 6 feet apart. But, he was too lazy to come up with a creative solution that would have worked and kept him from being arrested.
I think of it less as "being lazy" than "being an attention whore asshole". It got him the publicity he desperately craves.
You know, the attention whore theory might be the correct one.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
3,594
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
WHAT'S THE VERB IN THAT PHRASE, DINGO??

"Gather to worship"

That's why it was in ITALICS, Dumbass.

:aug08_031:

THIS JUST IN -- worship does not require "gather" so spare us the persecution-complex Checkers Speeches.
Now, you're just playing the sort of absurd, intellectually-dishonest semantic games for which you are notorious.

The First Amendment is absolutely clear that we have a right to worship. It is equally clear that we have a right to peaceably assemble.

It absolutely, and undeniably follows from that, that we have a right to peaceably assemble, for the purpose of worship.

Even you, in all your madness and in all your deceitfulness, can't possibly believe that there is a case to be made that having two separate rights, which are not directly connected, does not mean that we have the right to exercise one of those rights pursuant to exercising the other.
 

Bob Blaylock

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
3,594
Points
360
Location
38°29′ North 121°26′ West
Maybe you can show me where in any religion that it is required to gather in a building in order to worship.
It is not my place to say what any religion other than my own requires of its followers.

It is not your place to do so, either. Nor is it government's place to do so.

My own religion normally requires it, but is making allowances for the current panic.
 

ABikerSailor

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
48,532
Reaction score
8,873
Points
2,040
Location
Amarillo TX
The "right to gather to worship" ain't in there.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
WHAT'S THE VERB IN THAT PHRASE, DINGO??

"Gather to worship"

That's why it was in ITALICS, Dumbass.

:aug08_031:

THIS JUST IN -- worship does not require "gather" so spare us the persecution-complex Checkers Speeches.
Now, you're just playing the sort of absurd, intellectually-dishonest semantic games for which you are notorious.

The First Amendment is absolutely clear that we have a right to worship. It is equally clear that we have a right to peaceably assemble.

It absolutely, and undeniably follows from that, that we have a right to peaceably assemble, for the purpose of worship.

Even you, in all your madness and in all your deceitfulness, can't possibly believe that there is a case to be made that having two separate rights, which are not directly connected, does not mean that we have the right to exercise one of those rights pursuant to exercising the other.
If the dude would have followed social distancing rules, he wouldn't have been arrested, but he didn't, so he was. And no, a temporary order given by the government isn't going against the Constitution. Why? Because it's for the general welfare (another phrase in the Constitution), and it is only TEMPORARY, not permanent. No, nobody's 1st Amendment rights have been taken away. If the dude was smart, he would rent out a drive in theater and hold services there. Not only is everyone far enough apart, but they are also in their own cars, so transmission would be extremely remote.

Not true in an enclosed building. Part of the reason they have modified the rules again is because of the choir that got together for practice, and almost all of them have come down with the virus. That is why doctors are now saying it's more than just droplets, it can stay in the air for up to 2 hours.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top