Quote:
Originally Posted by whitev70r
NY State wanted to limit attendance at religious gathering in light of Covid pandemic. US Supreme Court overturned that saying it is a 'threat to the 1st amendment' ... anyone want to guess who cast the pivotal vote as it was overturned 5-4?
|
There are 2 separate concepts here, and I think it is important to keep them separate when discussing what happened.
The 1st concept is what is allowed or disallowed in the 1st amendment. The 2nd concept is whether it is a smart thing for religious establishments to continue holding religious services during a pandemic. If you mix the 2 concepts up, or try to blend them together into a single argument, I'd say that's the wrong approach.
According to Wikipedia:
Quote:
|
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, or that would prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, or the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.
|
So if you were to read that, what does it say and mean to you? To me, it's pretty clear cut -- the 1st amendment says the government can't make laws that'd prevent the free exercise of religion. And since the constitution sits above all other laws, I don't know what other options there are except to call a spade a spade -- ie. the State government cannot make a law that overrides the 1st amendment.
The 2nd and completely separate question is -- is it smart for religious institutions to continue holding in-person religious services during a pandemic? I'd say this one is pretty clear cut too -- of course it's stupid to do so!