Quote:
Originally Posted by bagboy
Some posters seem to think it's okay for a government official, in this case the govenor, to enact a freeze or ban or pause on citizens constitutional rights to freedom of religion. What would be next? One govenor bans freedom of the press, another bans citizens from speaking about the virus, another announces confiscation of weapons from homes during this dangerous crisis. Once the first ball drops, this violation of rights would never end.
Personally, I don't think any gathering of any group is okay, church or other. But if we want to spit in the face of our very, very smart founders and start violating whatever article or ammendment to the Constitution we deem disposable, this country is not going to be in a good place.
|
There is no constitutional violation if the governor closes churches temporarily. He would not be banning a religion or establishing a state religion. He is using his authority to stop groups of more than a certain number from gathering in order to stop the spread of the virus as much as possible.
There is a current situation in CA where parishioners of a church have an inordinate number of positive virus tests due to assembling for worship and bible study. Who knows how many friends and neighbors they may have infected.
There is another thread on TOTV that describes the loss of a relative and illness of a spouse and nephew due to contracting the virus perhaps from a shopping trip.
It is for the good of all of us to not gather in groups, maintain social distancing, and sanitize ourselves and our environment as much as possible.