Unconstitutional

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,773
113
Utterly selfish to keep holding church when the country is on lock down.
However, if a church tells its members that only those who are healthy may assemble, and also take suitable precautions, while those who have symptoms should self-quarantine and stay home, that should be more than enough to be responsible citizens.

What we are seeing right now is more than just the protection of healthy people. We are seeing the destruction of economies and the restriction of liberties. And the coronavirus is similar to flu in its overall impact, while there are now drug combinations which have been proven to be effective against the infection.

Christians should understand that the people on the Task Force who should have been very careful and very responsible in their statements have been deliberately misleading the American public in a calculated attempt to destroy America (including attacks on effective drugs). Bill Gates has no business calling for a total shut down when no one called for a total shut down during flu epidemics.
 

UnoiAmarah

Junior Member
Jul 28, 2017
907
141
43
However, if a church tells its members that only those who are healthy may assemble, and also take suitable precautions, while those who have symptoms should self-quarantine and stay home, that should be more than enough to be responsible citizens.
That's the problem, it might be possible to transmit the virus after a person has been infected but before they become symptomatic.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
However, if a church tells its members that only those who are healthy may assemble, and also take suitable precautions, while those who have symptoms should self-quarantine and stay home, that should be more than enough to be responsible citizens.
Except you can be asymptomatic and spread to others. The rest of your comment I can't comment on because I don't know much of American law. I would say in certain situations gov't can do these things. But I can't speak to that.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
42,577
17,046
113
69
Tennessee
Where is your faith in God? The 3 Hebrew children prayed to God when they were told by the king not to, and they said that God would save them, either from the fire of the furnace, or buy the deliverance of death into heaven.
Actually, they were not children but grown men.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
42,577
17,046
113
69
Tennessee
Pardon me, what a bad mistake! They were God's children.
Still, to those not familiar with Daniel, they might think that they were actually children. Throwing children in a fiery furnace seems more grim and evil then throwing 3 grown men in. Yes, those 3 men were God's children.
 

UnoiAmarah

Junior Member
Jul 28, 2017
907
141
43
What we are seeing right now is more than just the protection of healthy people. .
It sounds more like a clusterflick blooming to me.
We are seeing the destruction of economies and the restriction of liberties.
I would say somebody is going to profit of this pandemic.

The 2 trillion dollar virus aid stimulus aid would amount to $ 6,000 for every man, woman and child of the 329 million citizens of the U.S. However, the package only pays $1200 for individual and $500 for kids.

But at 1,200 for ever one of the 329 million people that would come to 394.8 billion dollars. However, not everyone is going to get a stimulus check, those with children won't be getting $1,200 per child, so the 394 billion is a gross over estimation of the actual amount which will be actually be dispersed to individuals under this stimulus package.

But even with that 394 billlion the addition 500 Billion going to distressed corporations only totals 894 Billion of the 2 trillion. So that leaves 1.3 trillion dollars going to hospitals and unemployment benefits?
 

Didymous

Senior Member
Feb 22, 2018
5,047
2,101
113
If any form of government, being it city, state, or national establishes a law that says it is against the law to assemble for the purpose of worshiping God, it would be contrary to the constitution of the United States. If the Preacher who was arrested and put in jail in Florida was to file a lawsuit, He would win. What do you think?
Do you actually think the legal system works? :cool:
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,773
113
I would say somebody is going to profit of this pandemic.
Correct. Once again, the ones who genuinely need help will not get it, and the ones who are fat and greedy will benefit the most. For millions to go to the Kennedy Center or for sunscreen is to make a mockery of this relief effort. And President Trump should have vetoed this bill and exposed the politicizing of misery. Also, if the help was to really help, money should have gone out within 48 hours if a work force was properly mobilized for an emergency effort.

Above and beyond that, billionaire Bill Gates was conspiring behind the scenes to bring America to its knees, while encouraging China (and probably investing in Chinese state-controlled companies). He has been pushing for a total shutdown, while his surrogates (bought and paid for) Drs. Birx and Fauci have been fear-mongering with their phony IHME projections while failing to promote the drugs which have been found effective against this Wuhan virus. What is truly amazing is that Mr. Trump has allowed these medical hacks to have a platform, when their connections to Bill Gates are known.

Now they are backtracking and saying they overestimated everything. How come these people have not been fired?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,773
113
Further details revealed by the Daily Caller on the Coronavirus Stimulus Bill are quite shocking and in keeping with the agenda of Pelosi, who should have been impeached by the Republicans rather than allowed to control this bill:

Kennedy Center for Performing Arts (a non-essential) -- $25 million

Sunscreen mentioned throughout (a non-essential) -- not specified but probably at least a million

Postal service bailout -- a so-called loan of 10 billion which will probably never be repaid

Cash for Congress (a non-essential) -- 25 million which should have been turned around and made a fine against the Democrat Party for the enormous waste of time and resources in trying to take down Trump for 3 years. Plus all the billions which were actually spent wastefully by the Congress and Senate during that time.

There is probably a lot more that is hidden away and should be thoroughly investigated.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
Except you can be asymptomatic and spread to others. The rest of your comment I can't comment on because I don't know much of American law. I would say in certain situations gov't can do these things. But I can't speak to that.

Moses what in my comment did you disagree with?! Nothing. You're marking an x just to be disagreeable. Stop or you'll be reported. That is not what the x is for. smh
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
If any form of government, being it city, state, or national establishes a law that says it is against the law to assemble for the purpose of worshiping God, it would be contrary to the constitution of the United States. If the Preacher who was arrested and put in jail in Florida was to file a lawsuit, He would win. What do you think?
He would win except that the judge will not up hold the constitution. He will get his day in court.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
Part of the problem here is that they are not being told you can't assemble completely. Groups are limited to ten, and then there is what many churches have done and cyber assemble. Then there is what the church I will visit this Sunday is doing. The pastor is meeting with the whole church online and allowing family groups to come and meet with him out side for communion. So there are ways to do this correctly. This Florida pastor may or may not have been out of line. I think we should at least attempt to operate with in the law as much as possible.
 

WithinReason

Active member
Feb 21, 2020
929
136
43
Whether the person 'won' or not, would be irrelevant in regards the Constitution of the united States, and its lawful Amendments, such as the first amendment:


View attachment 213847 View attachment 213848 View attachment 213849 View attachment 213850 View attachment 213851

Basically, what I am saying, is, that the Constitution (otuS) and it's lawful Amendments superceded any such proceedings of trial. In fact, the arrest, jailing, fining, and trial itself would be illegal according to those two documents.

See also - https://archive.org/details/endtime...eyondthegravesisterili720p30fpsh264128kbitaac

Jump to time index 5:30 and minimally listen to the Q n A section, about 10 minutes or so.
In the home, is not enough for them, now they want to come for you in the home.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/zOvS1nEa3oQm/
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,974
5,531
113
Moses what in my comment did you disagree with?! Nothing. You're marking an x just to be disagreeable. Stop or you'll be reported. That is not what the x is for. smh
No, I'm not marking an x just to be disagreeable. When people make statements that are clearly wrong, or without providing any proof, I don't think there's anything in the rules against marking that I disagree. If there is a rule that prohibits this, then certainly, I won't do it. But the x mark is there for people to mark posts that they disagree with, is it not? I find your threatening to report me just for showing that I disagree with your opinion very disagreeable, however, and I marked that I also disagree with this statement, because I don't believe there is any such rule against marking with an x posts that one disagrees with.

Except you can be asymptomatic and spread to others.
This is the statement I disagreed with. Prove it, if it is true. The statement is simply not true, and a parroting of what unscientific propagandists may hypothesise on television, to keep up the fear-mongering.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
If any form of government, being it city, state, or national establishes a law that says it is against the law to assemble for the purpose of worshiping God, it would be contrary to the constitution of the United States. If the Preacher who was arrested and put in jail in Florida was to file a lawsuit, He would win. What do you think?
I think the pastor who put his people and his families at risk should not get away scott free..

and I am not sure if he would win, But I would hope not. to teach other leaders a lesson
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,974
5,531
113
I think the pastor who put his people and his families at risk should not get away scott free..

and I am not sure if he would win, But I would hope not. to teach other leaders a lesson
But surely first it should be proved that the pastor was indeed putting his people and his families at risk, should it not? It's easy to claim there is a virus. Much harder to prove that there is one, and that it can be spread via church.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
But surely first it should be proved that the pastor was indeed putting his people and his families at risk, should it not? It's easy to claim there is a virus. Much harder to prove that there is one, and that it can be spread via church.
just look around the country.

Any court of law would agree that it is putting your people in danger, If one person in that congregation had that virus, chances are, many of the congregation would be infected. How many people would have had to die before we determined he put his congregation at risk?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,111
3,687
113
just look around the country.

Any court of law would agree that it is putting your people in danger, If one person in that congregation had that virus, chances are, many of the congregation would be infected. How many people would have had to die before we determined he put his congregation at risk?
I wonder if the threat of a virus would have kept Paul down?
 

Moses_Young

Well-known member
Sep 15, 2019
9,974
5,531
113
just look around the country.

Any court of law would agree that it is putting your people in danger, If one person in that congregation had that virus, chances are, many of the congregation would be infected. How many people would have had to die before we determined he put his congregation at risk?
Prove it's the virus and not the 5G towers. Because the proof of what the risk actually is changes who is the one putting them at risk, does it not? If the risk is a virus, the pastor may have had a role to play. If the risk was caused by a change in the Earth's electric field brought on by 5G radiation, the pastor had nothing to do with it (but someone else did).