• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Illegal worship ban in California ended by Supreme Court

Discussion in 'Current News & Events (Articles Required)' started by The Liturgist, Feb 6, 2021.

  1. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian

    +1,068
    United States
    Christian
    Celibate
    Supreme Court ruling in California case allows indoor religious services to resume -- with some limits

    Unfortunately, the state is still allowed to restrict capacity to 25% and ban singing, but three justices opposed even that, which is a good sign that as infection numbers get under control, the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment will no longer be compromised (what would Patrick Henry say about these restrictions?).

    I now intend to sue the state of California for violating my rights, by preventing me from visiting churches in California I greatly love when I travel to the Golden State.
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. dqhall

    dqhall Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,794
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Other people may want to sue churches for spreading the virus intentionally. I read a testimony about a Canadian couple visiting Florida for the winter like they usually do. They flew to Florida and went to their 55+ trailer park. They forgot to buy health insurance. The Canadian universal health system does not cover out of country medical expense. They purchased out of country insurance after they got to Florida and soon had COVID. The husband was in the hospital for two weeks, then he was taken by air ambulance to Canada. The insurance company argued they purchased health insurance after they were infected, thus the insurance company would not cover them. The bills were estimated at $300,000 USD.

    I was able to find sermons and church service videos online for free. My freedom of religion was not denied. I would not want to attend such an unforgiving church as to sue a government interested in the welfare of its seniors anyway.
     
  3. nonaeroterraqueous

    nonaeroterraqueous Nonexistent Member

    +2,665
    United States
    Protestant
    Married
    Oh, were we supposed to have stopped? We ignored those rules. We've been attending and singing, and if one church complies with the rules, then we go find another church.

    My religion requires more than church service videos.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  4. dqhall

    dqhall Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,794
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    You may sing until your heart is content. You may attend services day and night. When communist governments closed churches, people met in homes or forests. A Bible study in my area met on zoom during the pandemic. Faith is more than a building and a hallelujah choir. There is an offering that must be collected for such high overhead religion.

    I have never sued or been sued. Other people might want to sue governments, hospitals, schools, police, businesses, motorists and churches. They even sue family members over division of inheritance. They sue spouses for division of property in divorce cases. They sue for child custody.

    In Florida places are open. They suffer loss of business as people do not want hospital bills. Insurance does not cover everything. Two hours in the emergency room cost one person $14,000. With vaccinations the death and hospitalization rates are falling. People may look for work.
     
  5. Pavel Mosko

    Pavel Mosko Arch-Dude of the Apostolic Supporter

    +3,427
    United States
    Oriental Orthodox
    Single
    I wonder how much that will help the Governor recall effort. My parents, brothers and a large chunk of my extended family lives in California. 14 years back they all did, but there has been a slow Exodus from the state, originally from crime, then from economics, which I think will continue because of state politics and the laws and regulations that come from it.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  6. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +29,422
    Anglican
    Married
    There is one rationalization or another for attempting to negate just about every provision in the Constitution, but that doesn't justify doing so. Elsewise, there wouldn't be any point to writing these rights into the Constitution in the first place.

    And that is especially true considering that the same people who come up with these infringements on Constitutional rights will simultaneously stand behind other ones--and doing that is almost a routine thing nowadays.
     
  7. NotreDame

    NotreDame Domer Supporter

    +2,384
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    US-Others
    There’s no point speculating what Patrick would say. If Patrick’s thoughts could be known today, one man from the past doesn’t determine what the Constitution says.

    SCOTUS allowing those specific restrictions isn’t only rational, but consistent with the 1st Amendment Free Exercise of Religion clause. Churches aren’t immune from the burdens other entities must taste in an effort to abate the spread of a very infectious virus. Rather, it is a matter of consistency, where inconsistent application of a ban/restrictions to identical, parallel, similarly situated entities in relation to churches, synagogues, mosques, which can violate the no discrimination against religion/religious principle of the Free Exercise of Religion Clause.
     
  8. Pavel Mosko

    Pavel Mosko Arch-Dude of the Apostolic Supporter

    +3,427
    United States
    Oriental Orthodox
    Single
    It drives me nuts when I hear liberals, especially folks on the open boards where non-Christians post use various canards and strawmen like "Freedom of Speech is not an absolute". Just about all sane people recognize the minimal regulation of speech that this country has for obvious common sense reasons. But these people tend to do that because they want the same kind of regulation of speech and freedom that takes place in Europe, Canada etc. (and quite often it is such people from those actual lands lobbying for that regulation here!)
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • List
  9. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian

    +1,068
    United States
    Christian
    Celibate
    My faith requires in person attendance to partake of the Holy Eucharist, and while in California, I was prevented from doing this

    Although I am the minister of a liturgical and theologically conservative Congregational church (although we may seek admission into another denomination due to the small size of the traditional Congregational community, and liturgical, Eucharistic churches being an even smaller subset), my church was not harmed by the actions of California as it is located elsewhere. And unlike a major mainline church that spent more than $40 million suing traditional parishes that wanted to leave, I don’t believe in using the church treasury to sue people.

    I plan on suing California rather in my capacity as a private citizen of liturgical Christian faith.
     
  10. The Liturgist

    The Liturgist Traditional Liturgical Christian

    +1,068
    United States
    Christian
    Celibate
    I sued a retailer when food purchased there, contaminated with e.coli bacteria, gave us severe food poisoning requiring hospitalization, and settled for a good sum of money; it was worth it, and such lawsuits are paid by the insurance companies, who in turn put pressure on retailers to improve food handling safety.
     
  11. dqhall

    dqhall Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,794
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    Some people may claim they have a constitutional right to attend the super bowl in person. Even that is closed for public safety concerns. It is not like places of worship are being singled out for unfair treatment.

    There are 50 states and Puerto Rico to chose from in America.

    Years ago there was a saying: “This is America, love it or leave it.” The airports for open for those who think they can find a better nation to accept them. There are worse places to be. I am grateful I do not live in a worse place.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  12. NotreDame

    NotreDame Domer Supporter

    +2,384
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    US-Others
    The issue is whether these restrictions are infringements on religious freedom in the 1st Amendment. The fact religious freedom is protected in the 1st Amendment doesn’t render some specific limitation as an infringement. Rights aren’t absolute.

    Restrictions imposed on religious practices aren’t new in the U.S., and they have been lawful. Bigamy and polygamy have been lawfully prohibited, despite the religious belief for one or both. Use of peyote as a religious sacrament in a religious ritual has been lawfully prohibited. Human sacrifice isn’t allowed as a religious practice. The sacrifice of animals has been and can be lawfully prohibited as a religious practice, especially when done in a manner which is unsanitary. Prohibiting the underage consumption of alcohol, where alcohol is part of a religious ritual, is lawful.

    Constitutionally, in this context, the legality is a matter of consistency. The disagreement has been over consistent application to entities parallel, similarly situated, or identical to religious entities. This is what Gorsuch and others have focused upon in these orders, whether the state has consistently applied its restrictions to religious entities to similarly situated, identical, or parallel entities.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  13. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +29,422
    Anglican
    Married
    Maybe so, but I didn't agree with that.

    Actually, it appears that they are.

    I don't know how much you are aware of all the restrictions involved in the case of churches but not similar institutions, so I won't comment further here.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  14. NotreDame

    NotreDame Domer Supporter

    +2,384
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    US-Others
    Okay. Ignoring these specific deplorables, with alleged sinister motives, there still remains the question whether the restrictions are not only rational but lawful. The fact some group of people want to use the restrictions with sinister motives doesn’t render the restriction as irrational or unlawful within a specific, factual context, such as a highly contagious, mutating virus, that has killed over 400,000 Americans in one year.

    And there are many people who support these restrictions, not only of churches, but other entities, because of a legitimate desire to abate the spread of the virus. The pursuit of abating the spread of the virus isn’t hijakced as nefarious on the basis of some people having sinister motives when the facts/context supports the restrictions.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  15. Maria Billingsley

    Maria Billingsley Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,428
    United States
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Churches are not above the law. We must obey what our heath officials deem necessary to protect our brothers and sisters from a potentially deadly disease. Why is that so hard to understand???
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  16. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    +29,422
    Anglican
    Married
    Why "it is so hard to understand" is that freedom of religion is guaranteed by the Constitution. If it can just be set aside arbitrarily--and make no mistake about it, that is what these decrees from state officials amount to--then there is, in fact, no freedom of religion. The excuse that is used does not change anything, especially when the rules imposed upon churches are stricter than they are for other institutions/gatherings.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  17. topher694

    topher694 Go Turtle!

    +2,160
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Intentionally? Give me a break. Garbage like that only makes things worse.
     
  18. Maria Billingsley

    Maria Billingsley Well-Known Member Supporter

    +3,428
    United States
    Christian
    In Relationship
    Freedom of religion has nothing to do with it. We are free to believe in our Lord, read His words and spread His Good News. Many pastors have seen the error of their ways as congregants die from their non compliance. This fight to congregate is deadly. Soon it will change when more people get vaccinated.
    I contracted Covid twice and three family members have died. I take this seriously as the health and well being of others is as loving as it gets. Be blessed.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
    • List
  19. NotreDame

    NotreDame Domer Supporter

    +2,384
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    US-Others
    The use of exaggeration to express the doom and gloom of “in fact, no freedom of religion.” These pandemic restrictions are not resulting in a “no freedom of religion” in the U.S. Rather, the restrictions result in a narrow, specific loss of “freedom of religion.”

    And the theme of being targeted victims is dubious, as other businesses have noted they aren’t treated the same as other similarly situated entities. This isn’t some pursuit to oppress the church and religious. A persistent complaint during the pandemic has been the unequal treatment of entities, not just churches.

    If I’d didn’t know better, I’d think this was Rome, under the rule of Nero, with the manner in which Christians are characterizing as the Great Tribulation like treatment of the church.
     
  20. topher694

    topher694 Go Turtle!

    +2,160
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Also part of the problem, not the solution. People died from the virus. No one has ever died from non compliance. Villainizing and basically accusing people of manslaughter for wanting to worship God only makes it worse.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
Loading...