But shouldn't certain rights be curtailed to protect the public from covid? I honestly don't know too much about the Constitution but in the UK we have the European Convention on Human Rights which has some absolute rights that can't be curtailed (eg right to life) - does Art 1 in relation to religion considered an absolute right?The Constitution says that we have the right to peaceably assemble and practice our religion. It's in the 1st Amendment. Leftwing marxists don't have much use for the 1st Amendment though
This case is a slam dunk in the old man's favor if we get a judge that follows the Bill of Rights.
No, the state of California cannot infringe upon the 1st Amendment rights.But shouldn't certain rights be curtailed to protect the public from covid?
Lmao. Stopped right here. Grow up or tell us whos dime youre here posting on.But shouldn't certain rights be curtailed to protect the public from covid?
Thank you for the reply. As for people taking risks, surely people should be prevented from catching a highly infectious possibly fatal virus that can spread very quickly? I'm not saying shut the churches cos as I said in my first reply there's other ways around it all but the state does have to act in a paternalistic way to protect the public from harm or else they've failed usNo, the state of California cannot infringe upon the 1st Amendment rights.
As far as covid, people know the risks by now, and can make their own decisions on the risks they take in life and how they want to live.
No idea what you mean here, just posing the question. Surely you can see by now that actions should be taken to prevent the spread of covid. Not that I'm saying churches need to necessarily close.Lmao. Stopped right here. Grow up or tell us whos dime youre here posting on.
I disagree. The Left keeping everyone at home and with masks on is the over protective mother that doesn't let her kid go outside to learn how to survive. The Left wing movement in our government is maternalism on steriods.but the state does have to act in a paternalistic way to protect the public from harm or else they've failed us
Ok I understand your views much better now altho I respectfully disagree with them.I disagree. The Left keeping everyone at home and with masks on is the over protective mother that doesn't let her kid go outside to learn how to survive. The Left wing movement in our government is maternalism on steriods.
Also, the govt's job is to protect my freedoms in the Constitution. My job is to manage my risks in life.
In the USA, we have traditionally valued our freedoms and would rather manage our own risk. That has been changing over time unfortunately.Ok I understand your views much better now altho I respectfully disagree with them.
As for blaming the left, I'm not overly keyed into US politics but as the GOP is in power surely the blame in on them, not the left? The Conservative government here has faced a lot of criticism on their mishandling of the pandemic
So you're saying two wrongs make a right. The protesters should've worn masks and practiced social distancing. Just as the church goers should.Not a good reason to disregard the 1st Amendment right to peaceful assembly and freedom of religion.
Protesters were not social distancing as they looted and burned down buildings.
Add that to the list of completely avoidable actions by the CA gov that results in bilking the taxpayers.The church sued California and LA County and they won an $800,000 settlement.
Gavin Newsome lost
the 1st Amendment and the Constitution win
https://www.newsweek.com/church-tha...covid-rules-get-800k-legal-settlement-1624801
"California and Los Angeles County have agreed to pay a church that repeatedly defied Governor Gavin Newsom's public health restrictions amid the COVID-19 pandemic $800,000 in a legal settlement."