Kansas City expects those who will resume public attendance of various activities including "religious services" after May 6th to be registered as att

  • Thread starter Thread starter IanM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is that link reputable? My Noton security won’t let me open it and it looks like it is a blog.
That is part of the problem with this whole thing, the “facts” keep changing everyday. And too many people are using blogs, computer models and opinion pieces as fact. And the government and the media are loving every minute of it as they divide us into camps and continue to stir the pot.
Follow the money and the power, and there you will find the agenda covering the truth.
 
Last edited:
that’s the advantage of flying on the math 🙂

more seriously, just the visible diagram above suggests something similar to what I said . .
 
Wow! Now personal Twitter is considered news? What’s next? Your fortune cookies?
 
CilladeRoma said:
Because it is an infringement of the free exercise of my religion to have to report my presence to anyone.
Click to expand...
That is not in the Constitution. Free exercise of religion in no way equates or implies anonymity. Since it is the churches that keep the records, the objection makes no more sense than saying baptismal records are unconstitutional.
 
Baptismal and other Sacramental records and records for the Church itself are one thing.
Having the “state” ask Churces to collect information is a whole other ballgame.

It is disturbing to me that so many do not understand that.
 
Since the laws and constitution generally speaks to “privacy rights” and not “non-privacy rights” I’d say the onus is on those who insist on registration. I agree with Mike. If the fear of Mass is too great, stay home.

Or we split our Churches - sign-in Masses and no sign-in Masses.
 
You refer to people screaming about a privacy invasion the same way many refer to people screaming about their fear of COVID. Interesting.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Granted, they probably butchered his exact words.
 
Last edited:
What about people who work for intelligence agencies? I can think of a number of jobs that will likely not want to participate nor be required to.
dochawk said:
Unless I’ve missed something, none of those allow their prior customer density, or close to it . . .
Click to expand...
So why do we not simply segregate and isolate seniors and the most vulnerable with separates Churches and Masses? This broadbrush approach seems silly.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Meinheimer said:
What about people who work for intelligence agencies? I can think of a number of jobs that will likely not want to participate nor be required to.
Click to expand...
That’s silly. Their own health people might do it, but it’s a national security problem if an office of people or a good number of people in an agency are sick.
 
I can assure you we are not “supposed” to be tracked. Whether it happens is another matter.

ODNI has its own measures in place to manage the virus, and they don’t involve public apps.
 
Dr_Meinheimer said:
ODNI has its own measures in place to manage the virus, and they don’t involve public apps.
Click to expand...
That comment would be pertinent if we were talking about public apps. I just thought we were talking about prudent contact tracing to prevent the spread of a disease.
 
PaulinVA said:
about
Click to expand...
I assumed it was apps, but either way, ODNI is not in the habit of sharing who travels to which agencies, and what their schedule is. The encourage folks to vary their routine for numerous reasons.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Meinheimer said:
The encourage folks to vary their routine for numerous reasons.
Click to expand...
I was briefed by a bunch of special forces operators before a unit deployment a long time ago. They talked about varying ones routes and routines to confuse the terrorists.

To this day, when I take a wrong turn when I’m driving with my wife I just tell her I’m confusing the terrorists.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Meinheimer said:
So why do we not simply segregate and isolate seniors and the most vulnerable with separates Churches and Masses? This broadbrush approach seems silly.
Click to expand...
That might work–but anything that treats a church difrerently than other things will bring immediate lawsuits.

I think that we would need to replace our single Sunday Divine liturgy with about six, and Saturday’s with about four to keep distancing . . .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top