Chicago Threatens To Condemn - Possibly Demolish - Churches Defying Lockdown

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,537]

2 hours ago, waltz said:

Update, daughter tested negative.   Still pissed time sensitive information was not provided.  Anyone have a decent study that gives values onto the lapse of exposure to virus assuming the correctness of the test and when a test is considered legitimate (positive or negative), not easy to find.

waltz
 

semi celebrating.

While i do not know you as a person it is good to hear things are ok. You personally might very well give insight to your personal experience to this debacle. And that would be first hand emotions....Are you aware it is illegal to share personal health care information in the US....had that not been illegal think of the discourse that would have occured in this country if we all knew who was infected...who was ill....who was a carrier.. Regress civilization 2000 yrs would have been the results. Isolation...and villifaction by the masses. Mob Rules.

It seems you suffered personal agnst and with your loved ones....how about a total stranger.

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 5/26/2020 at 8:58 PM, Enthalpic said:

It is not "China flu" even trump recognizes it is not influenza.  Adding "China" just shows your hate for them, fine, but understand that the USA is leading the world with this infection...

 

I have no problem with church, just practice distancing.  So about 3 people per pew and only every other pew filled. No abandoning science and praying for a miracle.

“It’s going to disappear. One day, it’s like a miracle, it will disappear.”

 

P.S. The bible says you do not need church to pray.

 

Health is not public. The individual involved can infect each other. It is nobody else's business. We know how to protect ourselves from infection. So long as those people are not attacking you and removing your PPE and coughing in your face, which would be assault, they are not putting anyone else at risk that isn't interacting with them by choice. The fact that you can count infections in a population does not make the infections a public health issue so long as the public knows that it is there and has a choice about exposure.

 

 

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 5/26/2020 at 9:03 PM, Enthalpic said:

"Armed police" as compared to what unarmed police?  Sensationalism.

Were they breaking the law?  Yes. Police enforce laws.

Trump can say whatever he wants - only with you does it automatically become gospel. His power has limits.

You are thinking that the Mayor of  Chicago should be doing this?

What is not being enforced there is the law. The law under which the order was given is not constitutional, the justification for it is non existent, it is an arbitrary and capricious act. As it denies access to a house of worship, it is also a violation of the establishment clause. The public health department, the Mayor and whatever thugs they pulled in for the mission are all criminals in violating the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the Church goers and their pastor.

They have been put on notice by DOJ that State and municipality officials breaking constitutional protections will be prosecuted.

[0R0 + 6,251]

On 5/26/2020 at 9:28 PM, UNC12345 said:

Could it be this simple?  City is worried about the continued spread of the virus. Churches have an older demographic (prime target of said virus), they cram people together, then they sing joyously to spread the virus even further.  Police move in to stop groups who are needlessly endangering the health of others by possibly spreading the virus.  They are concerned about the community at large.  

Why does everything have to be a giant left wing plot/conspiracy to kill everyone's rights?

1. The city is not in the throws of a fast advancing deadly plague.

2. it is by right that people chose to risk their lives by exposure to possible infection. It is nobody else's business

3. This lockdown is a purely arbitrary and capricious action, justified by nothing at all now that we know that it is not particularly deadly and is easily avoided with simple PPE. If there ever was a justification for a lockdown, there is none now.

4 It is a left wing power grab with no shame, no reason and no purpose other than terrorizing the citizenry into subjugation to power. .

[GeneralLevy + 5]

Civil War incoming 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

8 minutes ago, GeneralLevy said:

Civil War incoming 

I hope, as a nation, it isn’t. We should be smarter than that!

[Otis11 + 551]

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I hope, as a nation, it isn’t. We should be smarter than that!

With all the corruption, do you really expect those guilty of numerous crimes to relinquish their power and priviledge readily and peacefully?

I hope it doesnt come to that, but the more and more I learn, the less I believe there is another way...

 

Hope I'm wrong.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I hope, as a nation, it isn’t. We should be smarter than that!

Those thugs in power are not going to relinquish it nicely. 

My prediction is this coming election will experience the largest and most obvious voter fraud in history. We've had it before, Kennedy would never have been elected in an honest election, it took the Daly machine in Chicago to turn in the thousands of fake votes. Johnson bragged about faking votes back in Texas, the story went something like:

In a graveyard getting names off tombstones when Johnson says he can't read one and his  boss tells him, "Ya all get back there and figure out that name, he's got just as much right to vote as everyone else here".

The difference this time? The public won't stand for it. Sure the kind of mobs out in Minnesota will join the antifa crew to back the Demoncrats but this time around the rest of the country will say enough is enough. At least a few of the police will join them or just step out of the way. Not full on civil war but definitely civil unrest like we haven't seen since the 60's. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

9 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

With all the corruption, do you really expect those guilty of numerous crimes to relinquish their power and priviledge readily and peacefully?

I hope it doesnt come to that, but the more and more I learn, the less I believe there is another way...

 

Hope I'm wrong.

Hey Otis, long time.

I believe the military is still in the President's corner, and there will not be civil war without them.  Elected Sheriffs across the land have tended to side with reality and have in most cases turned a blind eye to refusals to adhere to Governor's "orders".  At lease throughout the Midwest and the South the Sheriffs hold a lot of sway and as elected officials don't have much choice but to act as the voters wish, within the law of course.  Up and down the East and Left coasts the police of all badge types may follow more along the lines of the Left, but it doesn't really matter because the coasts tend to be leftist anyways.

Bureaucrats will feel the wrath of the people, it just takes some more momentum and a leadership change can peacefully occur at the tops of the departments that went rogue.  There will be a few die-hards in the lower ranks that will try to make trouble but they will quickly see how little support they can drum up.  Government workers don't get motivated by much, much less fighting against a well armed citizenry.  They'll sacrifice their bosses in favor of getting to keep their benefits and pension.

Just my thoughts.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

14 hours ago, 0R0 said:

You are thinking that the Mayor of  Chicago should be doing this?

 

I said earlier in this thread that I have no problem with churches if they practice the distancing.  It's doable; you could have 3 services at 33% capacity.  Heck, many churches around here already offer 3 (early morning, later morning, evening).

If they just pretend nothing is happening and cram old people together in violation of public health order (COVID is a notifiable illness and therefore a public health issue.) I would close the place until they agree to follow guidelines.  

You are free to pray, zoom meeting, family prayers... you are just not allowed to start a large outbreak.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

48 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Those thugs in power are not going to relinquish it nicely. 

My prediction is this coming election will experience the largest and most obvious voter fraud in history.

 

Yeah trump is on record saying he won't accept election results... Haha

You are already preparing yourself to ignore election results and support his criminal actions.

Praise dictatorship!  Suspend elections entirely as the votes are fake!

Edited May 29, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

58 minutes ago, Otis11 said:

With all the corruption, do you really expect those guilty of numerous crimes to relinquish their power and priviledge readily and peacefully?

 

No, trump won't leave without a fight.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Otis11 + 551]

2 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

Hey Otis, long time.

Yep - still lurking from time to time though. Just havent had time to defend my posts so have been holding my tongue.

And glad to see it looks like most the solid posters are still around! (Even some of the trouble makers)

Not sure when things will settle down again, but turbulence brings opportunity, so make hay while the sun shines... (or as my favorite Club of Rome member puts it - be fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful.)

(Not that I support their objectives, but I can learn from the methods...)

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

Wow what leadership, the country is so broken that another civil war is being discussed as plausible. Of course, probably by a bunch of people who are too old to fight or don't even live in the country.  

People here have convicted the dems of ballot stuffing even before the election, yet alone any proof!  You have already prepared yourselves to dismiss the results and support trump.  If trump criminally holds onto power you might get your war. 

 

Go burn down a police station, I here that's a thing there now.   Make America Great! hahaha

Edited May 29, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Richard Snyder + 70]

4 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Those thugs in power are not going to relinquish it nicely. 

My prediction is this coming election will experience the largest and most obvious voter fraud in history. We've had it before, Kennedy would never have been elected in an honest election, it took the Daly machine in Chicago to turn in the thousands of fake votes. Johnson bragged about faking votes back in Texas, the story went something like:

In a graveyard getting names off tombstones when Johnson says he can't read one and his  boss tells him, "Ya all get back there and figure out that name, he's got just as much right to vote as everyone else here".

The difference this time? The public won't stand for it. Sure the kind of mobs out in Minnesota will join the antifa crew to back the Demoncrats but this time around the rest of the country will say enough is enough. At least a few of the police will join them or just step out of the way. Not full on civil war but definitely civil unrest like we haven't seen since the 60's. 

Vote by mail, and cheat by mail.  The "pandemic" allows the opportunity to stuff the ballot box whichever way you want.

[SUZNV + 1,197]

Obamagate without consequence will undermine the trust of people to the FBI and even the future elections. Without the trust, both sides will not accept the outcomes of any election and there will be a collapse in economy and higher of possibility with the Civil War. It is unacceptable for US citizens/party/organizations that have some sense in their mind to think by any mean of cheating/spying and win the election "for the greater good". Its very stupid to defeat an "evil" President in one term by cheating and lose the trust of half of the US forever. Election is political peaceful civil war, if people don't trust the election, at some point the Civil War will occur because election has no meaning.

Minneapolis and St Paul will  Mandatory Curfews this weekends after 3 days of vandalism and looting around urban and some suburbans. It seems they following metro stations. I wonder who these "protestors" vote for in next election?

And last time Minnesota voted red is in 1972. Got a new Dem Governor last year.

In Rome, do what Roman do, I will buy a gun and  do target practice and back to martial art training. Question: why have to shoot to kill but not in the legs or arms?

Edited May 29, 2020 by SUZNV

[notsonice + 1,062]

On 5/26/2020 at 7:07 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

NO. Absolutely NOT.

The Church was NOT "breaking the law."

An executive order is not a law.

The U.S. Constitution and Bill of Right protects Freedom of Religion.  

Chicago is shredding the Bill of Rights.

An executive order is not a law.?????? Tom where did you get your law degree from?????? I am not a lawyer, but the SC stated specifically in their ruling on this very issue on the executive orders made by Governors in regards to  restricting the number of people at religious gatherings is the  law.

Supreme Court rejects church’s challenge to temporary restrictions on religious gatherings

May 31, 2020 11:23:16 am

Angela Mauroni

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected South Bay United Pentecostal Church’s challenge against California Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order restricting the number of people at religious gatherings.

The majority held that the state guidelines in place “appear consistent with the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.” The opinion, written by Justice Kagan, stated that the “Constitution principally entrusts ‘[t]he safety and the health of the people’ to the politically accountable officials of the States.” She further wrote that the latitude granted to politically-accountable officials is especially broad when the officials are handling situations of “medical and scientific uncertainties.” Due to the seriousness of COVID-19 and its many uncertainties, the majority did not believe that the executive order had exceeded the governor’s authority.

The executive order currently allows attendance at 25 percent of the building’s capacity, or a maximum of 100 attendees at the service. The church requested an injunction on the order to allow them to hold gatherings freely.

The Supreme Court ruled five to four against the church’s request for injunctive relief, with Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissenting and Chief Justice Roberts concurring in the denial. The dissenting justices argued that the executive order “discriminate against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses,” in violation of the First Amendment. They also thought that the church “would suffer irreparable harm from not being able to hold services on Pentecost Sunday in a way that comparable secular businesses and persons can conduct their activities.”

The Supreme Court’s holding reflected the holding of the federal appeals court that previously heard the case. Both rulings run contrary to US President Donald Trump’s briefing on May 22 that places of worship would be considered “essential” operations, making them exempt from such restrictions.

Edited June 1, 2020 by notsonice

[canadas canadas + 136]

Demolition and destruction seem rather harsh and wasteful, more like eventual possible confiscation and expropriation.  This may be a hint of future moves against any non-profits who have acted like profiteers taking advantage of their status by accumulating money, assets, property much more than many for profits.  Some cults are big abusive business rackets.

Edited June 1, 2020 by canadas canadas

[0R0 + 6,251]

12 hours ago, notsonice said:

An executive order is not a law.?????? Tom where did you get your law degree from?????? I am not a lawyer, but the SC stated specifically in their ruling on this very issue on the executive orders made by Governors in regards to  restricting the number of people at religious gatherings is the  law.

Supreme Court rejects church’s challenge to temporary restrictions on religious gatherings

May 31, 2020 11:23:16 am

Angela Mauroni

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected South Bay United Pentecostal Church’s challenge against California Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order restricting the number of people at religious gatherings.

The majority held that the state guidelines in place “appear consistent with the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.” The opinion, written by Justice Kagan, stated that the “Constitution principally entrusts ‘[t]he safety and the health of the people’ to the politically accountable officials of the States.” She further wrote that the latitude granted to politically-accountable officials is especially broad when the officials are handling situations of “medical and scientific uncertainties.” Due to the seriousness of COVID-19 and its many uncertainties, the majority did not believe that the executive order had exceeded the governor’s authority.

The executive order currently allows attendance at 25 percent of the building’s capacity, or a maximum of 100 attendees at the service. The church requested an injunction on the order to allow them to hold gatherings freely.

The Supreme Court ruled five to four against the church’s request for injunctive relief, with Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissenting and Chief Justice Roberts concurring in the denial. The dissenting justices argued that the executive order “discriminate against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses,” in violation of the First Amendment. They also thought that the church “would suffer irreparable harm from not being able to hold services on Pentecost Sunday in a way that comparable secular businesses and persons can conduct their activities.”

The Supreme Court’s holding reflected the holding of the federal appeals court that previously heard the case. Both rulings run contrary to US President Donald Trump’s briefing on May 22 that places of worship would be considered “essential” operations, making them exempt from such restrictions.

Which makes it imperative to get someone who reads the authorities of government in the extremely limited range explicitly allowed by the constitution, as opposed to the liberal appointments that read those authorities as "whatever they need to be".

Hopefully, a Trump reelection will make that happen.

 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

17 hours ago, notsonice said:

An executive order is not a law.?????? Tom where did you get your law degree from?????? I am not a lawyer, but the SC stated specifically in their ruling on this very issue on the executive orders made by Governors in regards to  restricting the number of people at religious gatherings is the  law.

Supreme Court rejects church’s challenge to temporary restrictions on religious gatherings

May 31, 2020 11:23:16 am

Angela Mauroni

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected South Bay United Pentecostal Church’s challenge against California Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order restricting the number of people at religious gatherings.

The majority held that the state guidelines in place “appear consistent with the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment.” The opinion, written by Justice Kagan, stated that the “Constitution principally entrusts ‘[t]he safety and the health of the people’ to the politically accountable officials of the States.” She further wrote that the latitude granted to politically-accountable officials is especially broad when the officials are handling situations of “medical and scientific uncertainties.” Due to the seriousness of COVID-19 and its many uncertainties, the majority did not believe that the executive order had exceeded the governor’s authority.

The executive order currently allows attendance at 25 percent of the building’s capacity, or a maximum of 100 attendees at the service. The church requested an injunction on the order to allow them to hold gatherings freely.

The Supreme Court ruled five to four against the church’s request for injunctive relief, with Justices Kavanaugh, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissenting and Chief Justice Roberts concurring in the denial. The dissenting justices argued that the executive order “discriminate against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses,” in violation of the First Amendment. They also thought that the church “would suffer irreparable harm from not being able to hold services on Pentecost Sunday in a way that comparable secular businesses and persons can conduct their activities.”

The Supreme Court’s holding reflected the holding of the federal appeals court that previously heard the case. Both rulings run contrary to US President Donald Trump’s briefing on May 22 that places of worship would be considered “essential” operations, making them exempt from such restrictions.

This op ed is about a Mayor giving an executive order in Chicago. Last I checked

mayor != governor

Secondly, you act like Tom was somehow ignorant for not knowing a future ruling by the Supreme Court. 

 

[SERWIN + 749]

On 6/1/2020 at 1:58 PM, 0R0 said:

Which makes it imperative to get someone who reads the authorities of government in the extremely limited range explicitly allowed by the constitution, as opposed to the liberal appointments that read those authorities as "whatever they need to be".

Hopefully, a Trump reelection will make that happen.

 

All we need is for Ginsburg to retire or die, then the SCOTUS will be set up again in favor of the constitution again..... Isn't Sotamayer the super liberal bitch that couldn't even follow the basic rule of law before she was on the SC? She would just arbitrarily make a decision based on her personal feelings rather than word of law? Another one of odumba's MANY failures....