Supreme Court rejects challenge to keep from limiting church services

[GOYABEAN]

The genie is out of the bottle and that motherfucker isn't going back in !

[wew3]

Paraphrasing an old hockey joke, why don't pastors use the ploy "We were holding a protest and a service broke out"?

Bill

[GunLawyer001]

It's generally un-Constitutional for the state to single out religions for anything, whether it's special burden or special privileges. Exempting them from taxes that apply to other non-profits is as bad as saying that restaurants can re-open at 25% capacity but churches can't.

In this case, churches CAN re-open at 25% capacity, so the Court may have got this right.

But I still think that Roberts acts like a guy being blackmailed with photos of him and a pre-teen girl, or the corpse of his wife, or something. I thought this since he saved Obamacare as a "tax" law.

[ImminentDanger]

This vote by Roberts (and the left appointed judges) is only the latest, GLARING, example of the lack of respect for our Constitution. Our 2A Rights should have already been CLEARLY CONFIRMED by the undistorted reading of the Constitution and our other founding documents. Likewise, our 1st Amendment Rights are clearly being violated, right now, by the DICTATORIAL POWER given to governors due to the failures of our SUPPOSED REPRESENTATIVES to understand the corrupting force of POWER given indiscriminately. BTW, where are all the advocates of 'the wall of separation between the government and religion (churches)? Oh, I forgot, for the left, demands are ONLY ONE WAY and there is no reciprocity of justice.

Our SUPPOSED representatives have failed us, time and time again. And for a long time, the judiciary has failed to act impartially. Justice Roberts' claim of impartiality, or non-partisan perspectives, on the part of judges is a bald-faced lie that is obvious to anyone who examines judicial rulings in this regard.

The U.S. Supreme Court has been failing to protect THE PEOPLE from the government, which is their utmost purpose for existence. The tripartheid republic we have was intended to shield THE PEOPLE from government overreach, yet the failure of all branches of government, to respect the Constitution and to seek expanded power, has become despotic.

All of these failures demonstrate the need for small government, kept in check by denying anyone in government the powers that despots can use to force their will on THE PEOPLE. Far too much HOT AIR has willingly been embraced by the populace. The policitians continue to bluster on about promises of peace and safety, favors and money, the glorious leadership they will provide - all this as barter for votes. Their true character and intent is hidden behind a smoke screen of promises. Instead of being perfumed by these lies, the politicians should be seen as the fallible humans they are, as did the Founding Fathers, who understood power corrupts, therefore positing that power to the government should be highly limited. We have strayed far from this truth.

Respect for the Constitution, protection of the Rights of The One against the demands of the many, honest & reasonable promises made and those promises kept - this is what our representatives should be doing in fulfilling their oath of office.

In a time when True Character - honesty - service - fairness - transparency - compassion - is difficult to identify and promote in our political candidates, THE PEOPLE should be demanding LESS & LESS GOVERNMENT because what we get far too often is corrupt and works against The Will of THE PEOPLE.

As demonstrated during this time of Promoted Panic over 'mights and maybes', the government has become the MASTER OPPRESSOR of the Rights of THE PEOPLE, to deny them the ability to run their own lives, make their own choices, and Pursue Life, Liberty and Happiness as they see fit.

...

[abner13]

It's generally un-Constitutional for the state to single out religions for anything, whether it's special burden or special privileges. Exempting them from taxes that apply to other non-profits is as bad as saying that restaurants can re-open at 25% capacity but churches can't.

In this case, churches CAN re-open at 25% capacity, so the Court may have got this right.

Agreed , churches should be held to the same limits as other businesses.