Grace Community Church Defies Court With Packed Sunday Service

[Tone]

Theology.

Okay politicized theology...

 

[grasping the after wind]

We are not a democracy. If that was the case then president trump would have lost the election.

That is not a conclusion borne out by any factual information. If we would have been a democracy, we do not know who would have won the election because we do not know who all would have voted that under the reality refrained from doing so based upon the fact we are not a democracy. How many Californians that did not vote knowing that their vote would not mean a thing, would have run to the polls to vote for Trump if they thought that vote would count for something? Same question can be asked about potential Clinton voters in completely red controlled states. If we were a democracy, perhaps neither would have been in a position to become President. For that matter, if we were a democracy, I don't see that there would be such a position as President.

 

[grasping the after wind]

It is possible to conduct most worship services and not run the risks that would exist with, for example, a crowd at political rally. But it's the meat-axe, one size fits all, approach to church services that has usually been the way this has gone.

So that fact, coupled with the well-known truth that the ordinary people are to be governed but not the governors who feel at liberty to violate the same edicts that they themselves have laid down, cannot have failed to make people skeptical about the seriousness of those edicts.

Something to remember when it comes to finger-pointing.

In New York State, there are very strict rules for outdoor church services but no rules for outdoor protests or outdoor rioting. Does someone have a reasonable explanation for that? Why are protests and riots considered by NYS to be somehow immune from Covid complications but outdoor church services a potential menace that must be regulated much more harshly than outdoor protests and riots?

 

[NotreDame]

See my post #115

And you think a 100 person dorm in a county jail is parallel to a church service such that a “double standard” exists? That’s your answer?

A church service isn’t parallel to the necessity of facilities housing people convicted of a crime or held on the basis of PC to believe a crime was committed. A jail serves to protect the wider public from people convicted of or charged with a crime in which there is PC to believe a crime exists. This isn’t to suggest every person must be held in a jail but overcrowding in a jail during the pandemic is a necessity at times, the option of letting criminal loose onto the streets not being a palatable option.

Sure, maybe this is a choice between Scylla and Charybdis. An overcrowded jail of in which a Covid-19 outbreak is a heightened possibility, or permit some criminals or inmates where PC exists to believe they committed a crime to walk where they otherwise wouldn’t. The choice of some people cannot be released onto the streets and therefore, the jail is overcrowded isn’t irrational.

You’re comparing apples to oranges. Give me a better comparison to ponder.

 

[NotreDame]

So you are against religious liberties?
Such as Muslims being allowed to wear berkas to work for example?
Seems like a slippery slope..

Is it a slippery slope? Show me the slippery slope. I see no slide, and I see no slide leading downward.

You do? Why?

 

[NotreDame]

What about the right to assemble?

*You do know Grace is fighting this in a court battle right?

Yep, and they lost round one. Smart judge.

But I digress, the right to assemble, like our other rights, are not and never have been absolute.

The right of free speech to pass out political pamphlets advocating desertion, to draftees boarding ships destined to European shores in WWI was rightly forbidden. Why?

The famed Justice Holmes argued the circumstances justified the restriction of this kind of speech. Noting under other circumstances the speech would be lawful, but under the circumstances of the times, Congress can rightfully forbid the speech.

The same rationale can be extended to a right to assemble. It isn’t absolute. People have no right to assemble in the middle of a highway or intersection, obstructing traffic. The right to assemble doesn’t permit assembling in a residential neighborhood in the middle of the night that disturbs the sleeping residents. Neither does it permit assembling in such a manner as to be demonstrably unsafe to attendees or others.

Here, the scientific evidence is unequivocal, large indoor gatherings, like this church, have resulted in super spreading events world wide. Like the emergency situation of Schenk v U.S., the exigencies of today justify the prohibition of large indoor gatherings to reduce the spread of COVID. This is applicable to indoor political rallies as well, but not limited thereto, and the president’s obstinance and recalcitrance is duly noted.

 

[Tone]

And you think a 100 person dorm in a county jail is parallel to a church service such that a “double standard” exists? That’s your answer?

People are people.

the option of letting criminal loose onto the streets not being a palatable option.

Alleged remember. And they actually did let many go, because they realized, well, people are people.

 

[Tone]

Yep, and they lost round one. Smart judge.

Yeah at the local level.

You say Grace are lawbreakers...or lawless (was that you), yet, they aren't being accused of anything.

 

[Tone]

Here, the scientific evidence is unequivocal,

It's a bit early to make that claim. The scientific methodology is an enterprise not to be rushed...unless, of course, politicking is involved.

 

[Archivist]

Alleged remember. And they actually did let many go, because they realized, well, people are people.

if they are being held for trial it is alleged. Innocent until proven guilty. If the have plead guilty or been found guilty their status is no longer alleged.

 

[Tone]

if they are being held for trial it is alleged. Innocent until proven guilty. If the have plead guilty or been found guilty their status is no longer alleged.

Yeah, some got early kickouts too!

 

[NotreDame]

Acts 2:

Do they really believe this one church will cause a spike in cases and/or deaths?

I’m not omniscient. It is a lack of the quality of omniscience that results in humanity taking precautions to minimize risks associated with certain behaviors.

The evidence shows this kind of gathering has a elevated risk for spreading the virus. The goal is to avoid the gathering at the church facilitating spread of the virus. To this end, a temporary restriction for in person services is instituted. Especially at a time when there was wide community transmission.

I do believe the risk of positives as a result of the services is elevated and there is also an elevated risk of super spreading. The evidence supports this belief.

And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,"

That’s descriptive, and not a mandate.

Keeping one group of people at risk for the money, and demanding another group of people eliminate the risk, because...why?

For the money? No. Because they’re criminals and/or there’s PC to think they’ve committed a crime. You know, locking these people up for, oh, since maybe the dawn of civilization to protect the public, several millennia before COVID, to protect the public.

 

[Tone]

Post #132 is almost entirely irrelevant.

 

[Archivist]

I’m not omniscient. It is a lack of the quality of omniscience that results in humanity taking precautions to minimize risks associated with certain behaviors.

The evidence shows this kind of gathering has a elevated risk for spreading the virus. The goal is to avoid the gathering at the church facilitating spread of the virus. To this end, a temporary restriction for in person services is instituted. Especially at a time when there was wide community transmission.

I do believe the risk of positives as a result of the services is elevated and there is also an elevated risk of super spreading. The evidence supports this belief.

That’s descriptive, and not a mandate.

For the money? No. Because they’re criminals and/or there’s PC to think they’ve committed a crime. You know, locking these people up for, oh, since maybe the dawn of civilization to protect the public, several millennia before COVID, to protect the public.

In West Virginia we had over 70 cases COVID cases at five churches. One member of one of those churches has died from COVID. If this California church has not had any cases they are very fortunate.

 

[renniks]

Is it a slippery slope? Show me the slippery slope. I see no slide, and I see no slide leading downward.

You do? Why?

If you restrict this churches religious freedom, it sets a precedent to restrict other religions also. Why would you want that?

 

[dqhall]

In West Virginia we had over 70 cases COVID cases at five churches. One member of one of those churches has died from COVID. If this California church has not had any cases they are very fortunate.

93 people attended a church in Arkansas. 38% of the church attendees were infected. Three church members died and one community member outside the church died as a result. No estimate of how many were hospitalized or what the cost of intensive care was. Not your typical Sunday service. Over 3% of those attending died. This was back in March before standard of care may have improved.
High COVID-19 Attack Rate Among Attendees at Events at a Church ...

 

[Archivist]

93 people attended a church in Arkansas. 38% of the church attendees were infected. Three church members died and one community member outside the church died as a result. No estimate of how many were hospitalized or what the cost of intensive care was. Not your typical Sunday service. Over 3% of those attending died. This was back in March before standard of care may have improved.
High COVID-19 Attack Rate Among Attendees at Events at a Church ...

That’s why churches need spacing, masks, no singing. or handshakes

 

[Emsmom1]

My family attended this church in the past and my parents still do occasionally.

My Mom told me recently that they were meeting in the parking lot that they rented from the city for like 30 years, until, out of spite, the city said that they wouldn't rent to them anymore.

They were meeting inside. Outdoor worship services are allowed in So Cal; indoor services are not.

 

[Tone]

They were meeting inside. Outdoor worship services are allowed in So Cal; indoor services are not.

Yeah, I cleaned that one up further down the thread. Thank you.

 

[Arcangl86]

If you restrict this churches religious freedom, it sets a precedent to restrict other religions also. Why would you want that?

As has been said, none of the freedoms in the Bill of Rights are absolute. It's why we can still outlaw polygamy and human sacrifice. This is a temporary precaution meant to protect the larger community.