Singing in California churches banned

[Funvod]

This is why I don’t use American message boards that often. -.-

 

[dscath]

Since this is a statewide ban I think similar measures are very pertinent. You wouldn’t happen to be…

GAVIN IS THAT YOU?

When out of cogent argument, ad hominem attacks are always good…NOT

 

[JulianN]

Sorry I’m too high test to not sing in church. Imagine telling St. Peter

W-well I didn’t want to get the sniffles

It’s more like telling St. Peter, “I know that my singing might have killed people, but you don’t mind a few early arrivals, right? I mean, that song was more important than their lives, wasn’t it?”

 

[Beryllos]

You’ve got it backwards. When you sing, you put others at risk. Perhaps after your long life, Saint Peter will introduce you to all the ones you sent up early.

 

[Funvod]

Reason 2 why I don’t like American boards.
Seriously if you’re trolling or trying to be clever you’re like Reddit lite at best, nevermind that this is supposed to be a Catholic board.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m sorry then, I should have said for Latin Catholics it is not a big deal.

Most Masses I attend (like on all weekdays) do not have any singing.

 

[Victoria33]

Covid can be airborne. I have no problem with all cautionary measures as long as they don’t appear to be discriminatory. If one is saying Churches close but some other places can be open, I have a problem with that.

 

[Funvod]

I mean if I went all out I’d get banned again, so I have to be a bit careful (jk mods I love you guys).

Sure.

Why is it wrong to try to point out double standards in government mandates? Is that sort of thinking not allowed where you’re from?

I’m from the US. I just spent much of late-tweens to late teens abroad, so most of my important memories are from there.

Since you seem insistent that I comment on the protests, I don’t believe that people are really known for singing during them. Not sure if you can count a ban on singing as a double standard if protests aren’t musical events to begin with. From the few posts I’ve seen, they appear to be taking appropriate safety measures, but I can’t really comment on them. So there, you have my opinion based on what I know.

And FWIW people are, in fact, ‘allowed’ to disagree with the government in Korea. But taking measures against the virus would be seen as a common sense thing. I’m kind of shocked that a lot of people even in my area of the US seem to have an issue with basic safety procedures tbh. It’s not a difficult concept.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I’m more interested in just having Mass than I am in dying on the hill of singing at it when like I said Latin Catholics don’t sing much anyway.

 

[CathoRick]

Is your church going to listen to this nonsense?

No, because we’re not Californian.

We all sing at my Church, and I notice we do it louder and prouder than we did pre-COVID.

 

[Beryllos]

May the Lord keep you well.

 

[Funvod]

-who benefits?

The populace, especially those who are high risk.

-who is affected?

Someone with a burning desire to sing at Church I guess. Not really comparable to those who risk death.

-what are the ramifications?

That the virus is curtailed, something that is sorely needed in the US.

-are there unnecessary exceptions to the law?

From what I can tell in the article, no. Not that that’s stopping pastors from breaking it anyway.

By your own criteria, this shouldn’t be an issue. I don’t understand how this is so political. This is not an issue outside of the US and ig Brazil, and it shows.

 

[christofirst]

I live in California, and my personal preference at Mass is, the less singing, the better. I appreciate the effort and skill of our music ministers, but I just don’t care for singing at Mass. Add that to the fact that this prohibition is being done for a good and valid reason, the health of the congregation during this time of the pandemic, and this temporary banning of singing at Mass does not bother me at all.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Our Diocese has had a no singing, no choirs restriction since the first public masses resumed. Singing spreads droplets of saliva in a greater way than speaking does. It is a simple way to help protect each other

 

[puer.dei]

Like think for a minute. What’s more likely to spread disease? A group of less than 100 people in a building singing 6 feet apart in moderate decibel levels?

Then complain about the protests, not the churches that are doing the right thing.

 

[Funvod]

That and government operatives who are Anti-Christian.

This site never ceases to amaze me. Not singing is not anti-Christian. This is a public health measure.

Restrictions are also put on churches, increasing overall negative connotations the public might carry in relation to religious institutions.

Plenty of restrictions on other public places too.

Once again, there was absolutely no effort to stop protests where thousands of people gathered and destroyed property (especially near my area in LA).

Ok. I still fail to see how that affects the legitimacy of the singing ban.
Just because the government failed to deal with violent protestors adequately does not mean that this restriction is invalid.

Like think for a minute. What’s more likely to spread disease? A group of less than 100 people in a building singing 6 feet apart in moderate decibel levels?
Or thousands of people packed into the streets, screaming protest chants, breaking down glass windows and doorways (getting cut in the process),

Both are capable of spreading disease. Both should be dealt with adequately. This comparison does not help your case, it’s illustrating two issues that need to be addressed.

So do you have an actual reason for why singing in Church shouldn’t be halted for the time being as per CDC guidelines, or are you going to talk about the protests again? There’s plenty of threads on the protests and BLM, go post your grievances there.

 

[CoffeeFanatic]

It’s a huge problem for Orthodox Christians. ALL services are (at least) chanted. To ban chanting IS to ban our services.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Funvod:

…Of staying healthy. I feel like that’s a pretty important agenda.

If that were the goal, why weren’t the protests banned?

Outdoors vs indoors. The virus spread much better indoors where there is little fresh air to carry the virus away. Also UV light from the sun breaks down the virus in a minute.

 

[Funvod]

I mean come on. You lived in South Korea, which is probably one of the most corrupt “democratic” nations in the world right now. You should know how governments can operate to protect special interests and attack those it sees fit.

Just curious, what about South Korea makes it so corrupt?
I think there’s definite issues with the country, but you seem to be pretty knowledgeable. Enlighten me.

I never once said I think the measure is unnecessary

You are correct. I assumed that that was the stance you were taking, given the thread topic and your distaste for the measure. To that end:

My point is you need to look deeper and ask why the state is placing this measure here and now, and why it is particularly concerned with places of worship.

My point still stands. This is a public health measure.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

…so says expert epidemiologist Anonkun? But the real epidemiologists are saying what I said. That is why it is not a double standard.