Bill Barr threatens to join lawsuits against stay-home orders

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

You have kind of made my point for me in an indirect way.

Many of the first immigrants to the the early colonies were Protestants seeking religious freedom from the Catholic church, its brutal Inquisition, corrupt Popes and Cardinals, and the religious political battles taking place. They were all Christians, but had very different ideas as to the proper way to worship and celebrate their faith.

For some, that included a rejection of everything that came from "Paul" nee Saul of Tarsus, that you quoted, with a firm focus on the specific teachings of Jesus, which are found in the first four Gospels of the New Testament.

It's not your place to tell me how to worship -- whether to do it online, or whatever -- and the Bill of Rights guarantees my right to choose for myself how to worship. And, of course, it's not the place of governors to tell their citizens how to worship. The "free exercise" thereof guarantees my right to worship as I/we see fit. No one else.

And everyone, including these worshipers, have the same right. That they are being persecuted for it -- even while observing social distancing -- makes it especially egregious. And for the same reason it violates their right to assemble peaceably -- and as you noted, in accordance with the social distancing orders -- it violates their right to worship freely. The fact that these churches have tried to come up with alternative ways to commune and worship in accordance with their faith is to their credit.

a reply to: Boadicea

Exactly, and I have far, far less problem with these churches gathering in this manner, like an old time drive-in movie, where they can all see each other even if they cannot speak or interact directly, than those churches that have continue to practice in the traditional manner.

These churches should have been lauded by their local officials for finding ways to observe the rules *and* continue with their traditional practices given the importance of faith as a backbone of so many of our communities. Even if it isn't a cornerstone to every American, it still is to many. With mental health on the decline during this time, this could have been one remedy for many, even at a remove.

Instead, local officials chose to be authoritarian and dictatorial about it.

I have to ask ... If a college had chosen to hold their lectures in this manner, would people have this much trouble with it?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

Exactly, and I have far, far less problem with these churches gathering in this manner... than those churches that have continue to practice in the traditional manner.

These churches should have been lauded by their local officials for finding ways to observe the rules *and* continue with their traditional practices given the importance of faith as a backbone of so many of our communities.

Yes! Public officials should have been lauding AND thanking them for setting a positive example of working within their guidelines, making compromises, making the most of current technology, and making safety for their congregation a priority.

The fact that they didn't strongly suggests that state officials were more interested in persecuting them than their safety and well being.

With mental health on the decline during this time, this could have been one remedy for many, even at a remove.

One more indication that their concerns and priorities for the health and well being of the people are quite selective. There is no thought or regard for those being hurt, including mental and emotional health, much less spiritual health.

I have to ask ... If a college had chosen to hold their lectures in this manner, would people have this much trouble with it?

Very good question.

a reply to: Boadicea

Monday, 4-27-2020

Another warning from A.G. Barr to state and local governments today.

“For example, the Constitution also forbids, in certain circumstances, discrimination against disfavored speech and undue interference with the national economy,” Barr continued.

“If a state or local ordinance crosses the line from an appropriate exercise of authority to stop the spread of COVID19 into an overbearing infringement of constitutional and statutory protections, the Department of Justice may have an obligation to address that overreach in federal court.”

More at: dailycaller.com...

a reply to: carewemust

Thank you.

Good to see.

A little bit more from Barr:

Barr Orders U.S. Attorneys to Look for Civil Liberties Violations, ‘Take Action to Correct Them’ if Needed

The memo instructs U.S. Attorneys to “be on the lookout” for orders by state and local governments which encroach upon the rights of citizens.

Barr said he is expanding the mandate on prosecutors previously directed to prioritize cases against persons accused of illegally profiting from PPE hoarding and price gouging to also encompass constitutional violations.

“Now, I am directing each of our United States Attorneys to also be on the lookout for state and local directives that could be violating the constitutional rights and civil liberties of individual citizens,” Barr wrote.

I don't want to say "too little too late," but I will say it's about damn time.

a reply to: Boadicea

The sooner this gets to SCOTUS the better. Because this is going to happen all over again in the Fall.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Boadicea

The sooner this gets to SCOTUS the better. Because this is going to happen all over again in the Fall.

If it does happen again in fall, then I definitely agree this needs to get to SCOTUS as soon as possible.

But I'm not so sure it will happen again in fall. There is a growing focus on how many people are being hurt by these shutdowns. And the harm being caused by both the medical care being provided, as well as the medical care not being provided.

More important, it is becomingly increasingly clear that the current reported death rates are not what they seem. In NYC in particular. It's about to get ugly.

a reply to: Boadicea

Im not sure about covid19 specifically, but I fully expect a spike in illness and disease as lockdowns are lifted and in the ensuing months. Since everything is "covid-related," well..

Too many havent had that consistent good exposure to all those bugs and viruses we used to get on a daily basis.

I think we might very well be compromising the immune systems of large portions of the population the longer lockdowns go on. Since folks have been conditioned to see it as "The Response," it could create exactly what people think it will prevent.

When we add in massive sums of money, power grabs, medical staff being laid off.. I have concerns.

a reply to: Serdgiam

Too many havent had that consistent good exposure to all those bugs and viruses we used to get on a daily basis. I think we might very well be compromising the immune systems of large portions of the population the longer lockdowns go on.

Excellent point, and I've wondered if that isn't true for many younger generations for their entire lives. It's not like when I was a kid, and we played in the dirt, played with bugs and spiders and snakes and lizards, got scrapes and cuts but just kept going cause we didn't want that dreaded iodine, climbed on and around wood piles and yard debris, drank water from hoses, shared popsicles and pixie sticks and candybars with our friends, the "10 second rule," and so on and so forth... And that's on top of actually having measles and mumps and chicken pox!

I think we also have to look at the many many prescription meds that cause lowered immunity, and wonder how many of the deaths and/or severe complications are due to people's bodies not being able to fight a simple virus.

Yeah, I think we have contributed to this pandemic in many ways.