Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner

801 - 820 of 841 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,572 Posts
The protestors were outside, not inside a building which is vastly different, and most of them were wearing masks. But this is rather obvious isn’t it. Perhaps if the church wanted to hold a service outside and everyone wore masks, then sure, compare that!!

I think you’ll find that if you make a sensible analogy, it’ll sound less troll like.

Still not a rights issue, but a public health one.
It’s okay, he’s on a roll.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,493 Posts
Absolutely. You predicted it right here before it happened! (Can't find that prediction right now.)

However, you haven't managed to follow through on the discussion we were having. Have you grown tired?

Yup. Kind of predictable.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,493 Posts
Is that the extent of your intellectual foray regarding church closures and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? You started relatively strong, but your carry-through could use some work.

Yup. Kind of predictable.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,749 Posts
Most churches calculated that the risk to their membership was greater than the value they saw in in-person services and shut down voluntarily. Only a very few didn't, because of what they valued
I agree to an extent. The churches are only considering the risk to their members, not any and every person their members may (or may have) come in contact with. Suppose my town has service available, where your neighbouring town does not. There's a very good chance that people from your town will come to mine for service, possibly introducing risks that would not otherwise have been there, simply because said service was available. At that point it doesn't matter that my town has agreed to self isolate after service...

Opening liquor and pot stores during the worst of the pandemic also indicates a calculated risk and one that authorities were keen to take.
I feel that liquor stores should have been closed. Full stop. It can be delivered, with far less risk than groceries. But the government makes big bucks on sales and they don't want those to drop when one can expect them to go up.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,421 Posts
I agree to an extent. The churches are only considering the risk to their members, not any and every person their members may (or may have) come in contact with. Suppose my town has service available, where your neighbouring town does not. There's a very good chance that people from your town will come to mine for service, possibly introducing risks that would not otherwise have been there, simply because said service was available. At that point it doesn't matter that my town has agreed to self isolate after service...



I feel that liquor stores should have been closed. Full stop. It can be delivered, with far less risk than groceries. But the government makes big bucks on sales and they don't want those to drop when one can expect them to go up.
Not sure what most churches are doing but mine you need to reserve your spot basically. They have limited numbers they can allow in. I think more people are congregating in Walmart and Costco than in churches, of course no issue there because.... well not sure why. Masks are required, you get screened before attending and you are seated and spaced out all per the governments guidelines and there has been no issues or cases so far. I still do the online as I am in the high risk category being diabetic.

Liquor stores should have definitely been shut down and this is part of the mixed message the government is giving. The world is ending COVID 19 oh no! But lets keep the LCBO (Ontario liquor store) open, pro sports and other things. It is either as bad as they say and they are not taking appropriate measures or it is part of the hygiene theatre and things are not quite as bad as they say.
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,610 Posts
I think you need to remember that in stores (like grocery, liquor etc) you just go in, walk around and grab what you want/need, and pay and leave. In a church, at least ones Ive been to, you sit down and don't move much for at least an hour. This is much much riskier accordion to medical experts, so that is the reason for the difference.

Liquor stores, not sure where I stand on that, but personally I think if Doug Ford is going to close all the other small businesses, he should have been consistent in this regard and closed LCBO to curbsude/delivery as well.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
42,493 Posts
Not sure what most churches are doing but mine you need to reserve your spot basically. They have limited numbers they can allow in. I think more people are congregating in Walmart and Costco than in churches, of course no issue there because.... well not sure why. Masks are required, you get screened before attending and you are seated and spaced out all per the governments guidelines and there has been no issues or cases so far. I still do the online as I am in the high risk category being diabetic.

Liquor stores should have definitely been shut down and this is part of the mixed message the government is giving. The world is ending COVID 19 oh no! But lets keep the LCBO (Ontario liquor store) open, pro sports and other things. It is either as bad as they say and they are not taking appropriate measures or it is part of the hygiene theatre and things are not quite as bad as they say.
This is what I was getting at before others dropped out of the discussion. There are risks to everything we do, just as there are risks with potential exposure to COVID-19. There a very few situations where the risk is non-zero. But church attendance, covered by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was among the easiest for local governments to dispose of. People are flying airliners to go on a completely optional vacation and there are protocols in place for that stuation on their return — even though tropical vacations are not specifically Charter protected. We saw various approaches to gambling halls, liquor stores, cheek-by-jowl unmasked protests, and Wal-Mart shopping where the government chose to tread lightly. In the absence of strong case law precedents, they chose to tread heavily on religious assembly: "Shut 'em down." But no options for member screening, taking temperature, opening church windows to improve ventilation, contact screening, possible quarantines.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,572 Posts
This is what I was getting at before others dropped out of the discussion. There are risks to everything we do, just as there are risks with potential exposure to COVID-19. There a very few situations where the risk is non-zero. But church attendance, covered by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, was among the easiest for local governments to dispose of. People are flying airliners to go on a completely optional vacation and there are protocols in place for that stuation on their return — even though tropical vacations are not specifically Charter protected. We saw various approaches to gambling halls, liquor stores, cheek-by-jowl unmasked protests, and Wal-Mart shopping where the government chose to tread lightly. In the absence of strong case law precedents, they chose to tread heavily on religious assembly: "Shut 'em down." But no options for member screening, taking temperature, opening church windows to improve ventilation, contact screening, possible quarantines.
How is in-person church attendance covered by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Quote the section, please.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,421 Posts
How is in-person church attendance covered by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Quote the section, please.
Not a lawyer but would not the simple right to a peaceful assembly apply or can the charter of rights and freedoms be turned off when needed?
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,610 Posts
How is in-person church attendance covered by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Quote the section, please.
he just can't help himself with the trolling. It's too bad really as it just flatlines anything. "This is what I was getting at before others dropped out of the discussion."

Just can't help himself.

Anyway, the real reason any legit debate stopped beside his incessant nonsense to goad, is his complete failure to provide a single credible argument to back his statements up. So he resorts to this childish stupidity..

(Are bans on religious gatherings constitutional? | Canadian Constitution Foundation)
The Supreme Court of Canada decided in the case R v Oakes that limits to Charter rights and freedoms can be justified if the government can show there is a pressing and substantial objective for the law and if the means chosen to achieve the law’s objectives are proportional to the burden imposed. To decide if the means are proportional, the objective must be rationally connected to the limit, the limit must minimally impair the Charter right, and there must be a balance between the benefits of the limit and its deleterious effects. St-Hilaire says it’s obvious that fighting a deadly disease is a pressing and substantial objective and that keeping people physically separated is rationally connected to limiting the size of religious services. It’s also clear that the benefit of the limit—saving lives—outweighs the negative effect—not being able to pray with one another.

The only viable argument a person might make is that such laws are not minimally impairing because it may still be possible to hold a religious gathering while keeping people two metres from others, perhaps while wearing face masks. However, St-Hilaire points out that the Supreme Court has said on numerous occasions that a limit may still be considered minimally impairing even if the claimant can think of less intrusive ways for the government to achieves its goal. After all, we elect legislators to weigh different considerations and make the calls about where to draw the lines.
Goading people with brainless nonsense on a forum isn't going to address anything like this. Although Im sure we'll see more, as he simply cannot help himself. Im sure we'll hear how these opinions are from RHINOS, or socialists or fake lawyers, or whatever comes handy ;) But an anonymous troll on a dead forum has more credibility!!! ;)
 

·
peek-a-boo
Joined
·
16,610 Posts
Not sure of the science on that one, seems people walking around, touching things around a store would be more dangerous then people sitting in one place wearing a mask the whole time. Are the masks not doing something?

I wonder with the LCBO if it is a union thing, same with the teachers. No pay cuts there, no lost wages while everyone else is cut back. I get the reason no one probably wants to say that people use alcohol to deal with things and pulling that would most likely have enraged a large portion of the population, light drinker or heavier, it is a simple luxury. But again if lives are really on the line here you would think it would have been closed. Personally I am glad they did not shut down, as well as other stores as I think shops of all kinds can safely operate. It is just the inconsistency of it all. Read last week from a Bishop in Toronto complaining (I believe rightly so) that a funeral in his 1,500 capacity church could only have 10 people in it but the LCBO around the could have more people in a significantly smaller place. I would not go as far to say it is anything against the church, just an over sight and people not thinking


Not a lawyer but would not the simple right to a peaceful assembly apply or can the charter of rights and freedoms be turned off when needed?
I can't give an expert opinion on that, as, Im not an expert. :) But from what Ive read of the experts, it seems the risk is far higher when one is in close proximity to others for extended periods of time, compared to being somewhere in a shorter time frame, even touching things as we all (should be) wash our hands diligently. Though I think there's nothing wrong with questioning the government's decisions. Im critical of our provincial government's hamfisted way of locking us down and well, in my opinion, unfairly targeting the many small business owners who were following guidelines carefully and often invested money into that, simply because enough idiots business owners flaunted the rules. But it's merely my own opinion. Certainly seeing the massive lineups into big box stores is frustrating.

I posted a link to something that may shed some light on the constitutional question. Based on what Ive read, church services are not covered by the charter entirely. I think there is currently a challenge to the ford government over allowing churches to have drive in services. It's my opinion that that, should be allowed, for obvious reasons.
 
801 - 820 of 841 Posts
Top