By Filings on
Church & Ministry
Church COVID Restrictions
Religious Liberty

“A three-judge panel on California’s 6th District Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Calvary Chapel San Jose on Monday, reversing lower court decisions against the church for holding large, in-person worship services in violation of restrictions” - CPost

Discussion

Fri, 08/19/22

Good news. A lot of “scientific” mistakes were made during the covid pandemic.

David R. Brumbelow

Tue, 08/23/22

It doesn’t really have much to do with the science, which is always “work in progress.” Policy makers always have to work with the best information they have at the time. People working on the science did amazingly well, all things considered.

But lots of states and municipalities misread the balance between public health and religious liberty—especially the status of religious gatherings vs non-religious gatherings, as case after case has shown.

And these cases demonstrate that our system still works, by the way.

The key point in the article:

Monday’s ruling referenced the 2020 decision Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo. The nation’s high court found that an executive order from then-New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo limiting attendance at houses of worship in areas with high levels of coronavirus transmission was unconstitutional because it allowed “essential” businesses like “acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, [and] garages” to continue admitting as many people as they wished.

The fundamental flaw was not that churches were asked to curtail their activities in the interest of public health but that different standards were applied to churches vs those applied to other similar entities. So… unconstitutional per first amendment.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.