Catholic and Jewish leaders sue New York over 10-person limit on services and mask mandate

[Maxirad]

Is the situation concerning religious liberty worse in New York than it has been in San Francisco as of recently?

Catholic and Jewish leaders sue New York over 10-person limit on services and mask mandate - Washington Examiner

 

[Irishmom2]

The article has no mention of San Francisco. Not sure why you are bringing that up actually.

 

[Rockoh22]

I have heard of this. Not sure of all the details, from the outside it looks like you have the freedom to rotes, but not the freedom to worship. Both are freedom of assembly or what ever it is called, but one is not allowed.

 

[Maxirad]

The article has no mention of San Francisco. Not sure why you are bringing that up actually.

Well, Irishmom2, there were severe restrictions on worship attendance in San Francisco until recently.

https://forums.catholic-questions.o...ristic-processions-to-free-the-mass/625660/19

 

[QContinuum]

Let them congregate if they wish. But they should also be required to sign legally binding waivers that they agree to surrender any right to emergency medical care. Why should the lives and health of EMS and medical staff in hospitals be put at risk for the right of another to believe in their religion?

Everybody focuses on abortion when it comes to right to life. But I think it’s abominable that one’s right to practice religion may supercede another’s life.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

Let them congregate if they wish. But they should also be required to sign legally binding waivers that they agree to surrender any right to emergency medical care. Why should the lives and health of EMS and medical staff in hospitals be put at risk for the right of another to believe in their religion?

Everybody focuses on abortion when it comes to right to life. But I think it’s abominable that one’s right to practice religion may supercede another’s life.

We don’t deny care or require waivers to smokers, people who drive without seatbelts or bike helmets, overweight people, or people who engage in promiscuous sex. Your idea is inhumane, illegal, un-Catholic, and a violation of the Hippocratic oath. For some reason, people act like COVID gives people license to treat others differently than every other hospitalization in history.

Other than that, it is a great idea.

 

[QContinuum]

We don’t deny care or require waivers to smokers, people who drive without seatbelts or bike helmets, overweight people, or people who engage in promiscuous sex. Your idea is inhumane, illegal, un-Catholic, and a violation of the Hippocratic oath

We do have laws requiring seatbelts, regulations and public mandates in many cities that require bike helmets, and more and more restrictions on smoking – specifically where it may be done. All of these health codes and laws that, like the quarantines and limits posed by the governor of NY, are there to protect the public health.

Your heated reaction aside, there is absolutely nothing inhumane about telling a group of people that if they wish to indulge in activities that place themselves in harm’s way, they may not have the expectation that others should be required to risk themselves as well as their loved ones to save said risk-takers from the consequences of their own choices. Risk-takers may have the freedom to meet unimpeded and the healthcare workers will be free from reckless endangerment of their lives and health.

I don’t particularly care if that’s Catholic or not. I care if it’s just and fair to the EMS, doctors, nurses, and hospital staff who should not be tasked with additional viral loads of irresponsible and pig-headed groups of people ignoring public health codes during a pandemic.

 

[ATraveller]

The problem is in America the rules look like double standards depending on location.
Unlike in other places, the rules are more consistent, avoid looking like discrimination and you can easily guess the reasoning behind them.

http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/community-settings/faith-based-spiritual-and-worship-practices

The Provincial Health Officer’s Order on Gatherings and Events prohibits events (e.g., congregations of people) of more than 50 people in one space at one time, recognizing that many spaces will have to have less than 50 people in order to allow for physical distancing.

The reason this order is in place is to ensure that public health has the capacity to identify and conduct contact tracing if a case (or cases) of COVID- 19 is detected within 14 days of the event.

Gatherings of more than 50 people make this critical public health measure to reduce spread difficult. In large buildings that have multiple spaces, as long as groups do not mix, a gathering less than 50 people in one space and a gathering less than 50 people in a separate space does not contravene the mass gathering order.

COVID-19 info for Albertans | Alberta.ca

Unless otherwise identified in public health orders, the following gathering restrictions are in place:

• 200 people maximum for audience-type community outdoor events, such as festivals, firework displays, rodeos and sporting events, and outdoor performances
• 100 people maximum for other outdoor events and indoor seated/audience events, including wedding ceremonies, funeral services, movie theatres, indoor arts and culture performances and other indoor spectator events where people remain seated
• 50 people maximum for indoor social gatherings , including wedding and funeral receptions and birthday parties
• No cap on the number of people (with public health measures in place):
  • worship gatherings
  • restaurant, cafes, lounges and bars
  • casinos and bingo halls
  • trade shows and exhibits

https://www.saskatchewan.ca/governm...avirus/public-health-measures/mass-gatherings

Restrictions limiting the size of indoor and outdoor public and private gatherings remain in place. Effective July 28, 2020, indoor and outdoor gatherings may have a maximum of 30 people provided a two metre separation can be maintained at times between individuals who are not in the same household.

The gathering size restriction does not apply to:

• Settings where people are distributed into multiple rooms or buildings, and workplaces.
• Critical public service or an allowable business service.
• Events and activities to the extent that the guidelines applicable to those events or activities found in the Re-Open Saskatchewan Plan explicitly permits or requires an alternative gathering size for a specific event or activity. In such a case, the gathering size explicitly permitted or required shall not be exceeded and specified physical distancing shall be maintained.

 

[ATraveller]

So the above three are guidelines from three Canadian provinces. They’re straight forward and treat everyone equally to the best of their abilities. The reasoning behind each measure is spelled out and where they aren’t you can easily guess what they are. And the measures tend to apply to categories of gatherings.
Based on what I’ve read New York’s look arbitrary and inconsistent. From my end, it looks like religious gatherings are restricted but other indoor gatherings can have larger numbers. Based on what reasons? Because a few may have broken the rules? Around where I live, a few restaurants have been shut down until they comply but the entire industry hasn’t been hit by harder restrictions.
You would think politicians, whose careers depend on PR, would be smart enough to figure out why there might be some resistance.

 

[QContinuum]

Based on what I’ve read New York’s look arbitrary and inconsistent. From my end, it looks like religious gatherings are restricted but other indoor gatherings can have larger numbers.

I do agree with this point. Gatherings should be categorized by similar risk factors, not whether it’s secular or religious or whatnot. I have read of some religious organizations protesting months ago because they were restricted, but grocery stores were not. These are not comparable for multiple reasons.

If we work from an understanding of infection as a result of (time) x (distance) x (viral dose) then the nature of the gathering in terms of if it’s religious or secular should have no bearing on risk assessment.

For example, whether a choir is meeting at church for am hour or a pop band is meeting to record songs for an hour - you still have an elevated risk. You have a people potentially shedding huge viral loads (from singing) in an indoor space in close proximity to each other.

Both should be subject to the same stipulations. Similarly, a church service, a movie theater, a concert performance, or just a get together at a bar all share similar levels of risk. They involve multiple people, in close quarters, over an extended period of time.

This is wholly different from a half hour in a grocery store, where one is moving about and presumably not standing too close with others for longer than 5 to 15 minutes to check out. The nature of exposure in that environment is not the same to a night at the opera.

With regard to NY’s laws, I am not certain but I can guess that the extra scrutiny, if that’s the case, is due to the still-fresh memories of March and April in NYC. Lest anyone has forgotten, the earliest outbreak originated in at least one religious community and the virus spread unchecked like wildfire.

At the time, no one was prepared. But having so many thousands dead several months later, including many doctors and nurses, Cuomo is not going to let it happen again.

If movie buffs and Broadway fans were agitating to have gatherings, and restrictions be damned, you’d hear as strong a condemnation from me on them as well. If people want to risk their own lives and health – fine.

But they should not be permitted to recklessly endanger others. Have them sign waivers and let them meet as they wish.

 

[Rockoh22]

Everybody focuses on abortion when it comes to right to life. But I think it’s abominable that one’s right to practice religion may supercede another’s life.

My family personally knows of about 10 to 15 people who have contracted COVID, raging from very young to very old. Those whom we know that contracted it, none have died, and said it was a bad case of the flu. Yes people do die from this virus, and it is not to be taken lightly. But we can and we do take precautions.

That said, what is more important? Riots, Drinking, Eating out or Church?

Church is not a non essential. It IS what we need.

 

[QContinuum]

My family personally knows of about 10 to 15 people who have contracted COVID,

I personally lost a longtime family friend two months ago. Our families grew up together, he was like a cousin. He was in his 50s and healthy. He started feeling bad on a Friday, tested positive the next day, was hospitalized Sunday morning. Was dead by Sunday night. None of us could even go to his funeral in person. It was broadcast online.

Another family member, a cousin, caught it along with her husband and children around the same time. They both made it along with their kids, but both are still suffering numerous health issues like kidney damage. They are in their 40s.

Yet another cousin lost one of her best friends in June. That person was in his 40s.

You have your anecdotes, and I have mine. This thing has killed hundreds of thousands and the truth is the risk of lethal infection corresponds to viral dose. Which is why so many young doctors and nurses have died from it. A hazard of their job is being exposed to multiple infectious people and performing super high risk procedures like intubation where probably millions of viral particles are shed each time.

This is why I said they should not have to be exposed to increased viral loads from people who directly and willfully chose to expose themselves to a virus. When they head to the hospital they are putting each medical professional in the line of fire and their families as well. That’s despicable.

That said, what is more important? Riots, Drinking, Eating out or Church?

Riots are illegal and should not happen in any situation. Protests, however, did take place here in Minneapolis and St. Paul, where they were conducted outside and almost everyone wore masks and social distanced. This is a wholly different environment than indoors drinking, singing, or going to church.

The virus is transmitted up to 19 times more effectively indoors than outdoors. Again, if infection is a function of time exposed x viral load x proximity/ distance, then sitting inside in the same place and breathing poorly ventilated air near to one or more infected persons will be a much greater risk.

Walking outside, obviously ventilated, where the virus can be destroyed by UV or high humidity, where movements of people constant and where everyone is wearing a mask, is not comparable.

And the data shows it. I kept meticulous notes of case numbers here in June. Not only did we not see any increase cases in the weeks following the protests, but hospitalizations also did not increase, but actually decreased. The first major spike in cases we saw came after the July 4 holiday, and just a week after the governor opened up bars and churches again (at the end of June).

Im terms of what is more important, eating out or going to church, neither of these is important to me. Well, eating out is important because it supports the local economy and churches provide charitable support.

 

[QContinuum]

2/2

But neither activity is more important to me than the health and lives of medical staff and their families. In fact, I would place their continued health as far more critical to our society than church services, which actually pose a direct threat of spreading a deadly virus.

You will make your own judgement about the value of church services, but in mine, indoor gatherings, whether religious or secular, should be done at the risk of the individuals themselves. Like a sign at the beach, “Swim at your risk,” there should be a similar understanding for those who flaunt Germ Theory and insist on large indoor gatherings during a pandemic.

 

[QContinuum]

Church is not a non essential. It IS what we need.

Who is “we?” I don’t need any such thing any more than I need to attend a synagogue, a mosque, or a Shinto temple. All of them are non-essential to me.

They perform services that are needed like charity work and education, that I will acknowledge. But I don’t need to congregate indoors, especially now, with groups of people in any setting. Religious or not.

 

[Rockoh22]

Who is “we?”

We is humanity.

Church is an essential service to the human race.

 

[QContinuum]

Church is an essential service to the human race.

I am part of the human race. And it’s not essential to me. In fact, I have thrived since I stopped having to pretend to myself that I ever believed.

 

[Rockoh22]

I am part of the human race. And it’s not essential to me. In fact, I have thrived since I stopped having to pretend to myself that I ever believed.

Thank you for your honest opinion. I can not compare it to anything else because with out God, nothing exist. But you feel how you feel, and I pray that you have a conversion of heart one day.

 

[QContinuum]

Thank you for your honest opinion. I can not compare it to anything else because with out God, nothing exist. But you feel how you feel, and I pray that you have a conversion of heart one day.

Having been raised in Evangelical Christianity where I learned my first verses at age 3, professed faith and was baptised at age 5, read the Bible for myself several times starting as a teenager, attended a conservative sectarian university (was considering becoming a minister), then embarking on several years of study first into Reformation Theology, then Early Church history, a study of the Church Fathers, being received into a continuuing Anglican church, considering crossing the Tiber and also looking into EO… there is nothing that particular philosophy/ religion can offer in terms of new information. And none of it could ever offer even the simplest bit of evidence to my inanately skeptical self.

Alongside of all that indoctrination, I happened to have received enough of a scientific and skeptical outlook that I could no longer deny the truth to myself. I do not believe, and I never really did. I wanted to, and convinced myself I did. Once I permitted myself to admit I don’t believe in the claims of theism or Christianity, it was a tremendous relief.

Since I walked away from it, I am much happier and at peace. Attending church is actually detrimental to me, in that it makes claims to know things it cannot about who I am as a human, and makes demands that inconsistent with reality as I have experienced it. That conflict was unhealthy to my mental health. I was never so depressed as when I was wholly immersed in religion.

If others find meaning in church or religion, then by all means, do so. But I am not going to ever agree that it is essential for my health, especially when attending at this time actually requires me to sustain an actual real risk to my health - Covid-19.

 

[Rockoh22]

I hear you. You learned and followed the “norm”. In all of what you said, you never said you have actually met the person of God. So, this makes you feel a certain way. Understandable.

As I see it. I have met Him, and my family has as well. I am a re-vert not a convert.

After wondering by my self for many years, not truly believing and even being close to becoming an Atheist, but never went far enough. I think I became agnostic or something like that. Well I had a powerful conversion. After that conversion I understood and my eyes where opened.

What was opened? That God was always there, present and walking with me. It is not something you see, or even feel. Not something I can explain to someone who has not experienced it.

By the way, not everyone has visions, locutions or any sort of other supernatural experience. Saint Terese of Lisieux, had nothing of the sorts. She just had a child like personality that accepted everything, as little as it was. A simple rose, or frost in the ground. But she never heard locutions or experience supernatural miracles.

 

[ATraveller]

If we work from an understanding of infection as a result of (time) x (distance) x (viral dose) then the nature of the gathering in terms of if it’s religious or secular should have no bearing on risk assessment.

In America, it’s 6 ft which is actually higher than most countries. The WHO recommends 1 metre or 3 ft 2 in., which is what everyone except the US, Canada and the UK use. In Australia it’s 1.5 metres. So the American distancing requirement is higher than most already.
I believe most places require masks during indoor services. That cuts down the dosage. Maybe someone from NY can tell us if that’s the case there. If not, then do that instead of arbitrarily lowering the limit.

For example, whether a choir is meeting at church for am hour or a pop band is meeting to record songs for an hour - you still have an elevated risk. You have a people potentially shedding huge viral loads (from singing) in an indoor space in close proximity to each other.

Those in NY should inform us. If choirs are singing and congregational singing is encouraged, then the authorities should make it clear it’s not the best time. Most will comply. Choirs are discouraged in most places.

With regard to NY’s laws, I am not certain but I can guess that the extra scrutiny, if that’s the case, is due to the still-fresh memories of March and April in NYC. Lest anyone has forgotten, the earliest outbreak originated in at least one religious community and the virus spread unchecked like wildfire.

If that’s driving decision making, then none of this is based on science. It’s just a knee-jerk reaction. That’s unhelpful and doesn’t create cohesion that’s needed. Again, a few restaurants were blatantly violating rules around where I live but no one has demanded every establishment to do take out like during the lockdown.

If movie buffs and Broadway fans were agitating to have gatherings, and restrictions be damned, you’d hear as strong a condemnation from me on them as well.

But protesters not only were agitating they ploughed right ahead.
There are reasons as to why in most places around the world outdoor events are also curbed and also require distancing not just masks. It is less risky to be outside but again, getting everyone to take on the burden of the restrictions is key to getting as many as possible to work together. This is the opposite approach to what has been happening in the US regardless of the officials having a (D) or an (R ) next to their names.
But curbing outdoor gatherings is also for contact tracing. The more people you have, the more difficult it is to trace. Which is why in Australia, they just arrested the organizers and early attendees of two different protests for flouting their restrictions. And clearly, it’s the best place to be during this pandemic (except Melbourne). NY actually discouraged its contact tracers from even asking if people have been protesting. That’s downright reckless.