DeBlasio says he will PERMANENTLY shut down churches and synagogues who do not comply

This is old news. The date on the article is March 30.

He mentions that he's referring to "specific" houses of worship, which tells me he's not concerned with all churches and synagogues. As for why he didn't mention mosques, it's entirely possible that there hasn't been a problem at mosques, which wouldv'e made it pretty stupid to say there was...

Right.

Not just say any house of worship?

Why?

If there's no problem with mosques (and, to be fair, I don't know if that's the case) why would it make sense to bring it up?

It would appear, reading the article, that some houses of worship have already run afoul of the rules and those are the ones DeBlasio is referring to...
 
I hate Trump, therefore everything DeBlasio does is fine.

Wow.

The dumb fuck goes to the gym every day, but no one else in NYC is allowed to....but that’s ok, because you hate Trump.
 
I doubt he has the right to do that, sounds unconstitutional to me. IMHO, this is political posturing in opposition to Trump's attempts to get the country and economy moving again as soon as possible. I gotta say though, that this is a stark reminder to be careful who you vote for.
Mayor DeBlasio still has a real problem on his hands. He's not "posturing." He's desperate.

Old Lady can hate Trump and also call out DeBlasio. It’s amazing more of you liberals can’t reconcile Trump hate and bad actions by liberals in your brains.
 
I doubt he has the right to do that, sounds unconstitutional to me. IMHO, this is political posturing in opposition to Trump's attempts to get the country and economy moving again as soon as possible. I gotta say though, that this is a stark reminder to be careful who you vote for.
Churches are not exempt from the requirement to have a state/city issued certificate of occupancy before they're allowed to have people occupy it.
That's not the issue
 
It’s amazing anyone would defend violating the first amendment in the first place.

The USSC said there are no absolute rights, even those in the bill of rights. The classic example is a law against yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater (that isn't on fire). Or saying something that leads to inciting a riot.

If you will accept the gubmint arresting you for taking a walk, then I can’t help you.
 
As for why he didn't mention mosques, it's entirely possible that there hasn't been a problem at mosques, which wouldv'e made it pretty stupid to say there was...
Every mosque I know of has been shut down for weeks. .... :cool:
I'm very proud of the people and they way they have responded to this...houses of worship should be allowed to open this weekend....
 
It’s amazing anyone would defend violating the first amendment in the first place.

The USSC said there are no absolute rights, even those in the bill of rights. The classic example is a law against yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater (that isn't on fire). Or saying something that leads to inciting a riot.
That was never the intent of the first amendment anyway. Neither was pornography, or intimiation, or a number of other things we think are protected these days
 
As for why he didn't mention mosques, it's entirely possible that there hasn't been a problem at mosques, which wouldv'e made it pretty stupid to say there was...
Every mosque I know of has been shut down for weeks. .... :cool:
I'm very proud of the people and they way they have responded to this...houses of worship should be allowed to open this weekend....

I'll never be accused of being even remotely religious, but I would like to think that the powers that be can figure out a way to allow worship services for those who find them important...
 
Churches are not exempt from the requirement to have a state/city issued certificate of occupancy before they're allowed to have people occupy it.

So why close the building forever. The year 2030? Church is fenced off? :auiqs.jpg:
First off, everybody is entitled to "due process" (14th amendment) requiring they have a process by which they can either administrative, or by lawsuit seek to reopen the building. In either case, the judge would elicit a promise to cease the violations by which the CO was revoked.
In short, if they promise to be good, they can use their church again.
 
I doubt he has the right to do that, sounds unconstitutional to me. IMHO, this is political posturing in opposition to Trump's attempts to get the country and economy moving again as soon as possible. I gotta say though, that this is a stark reminder to be careful who you vote for.
Mayor DeBlasio still has a real problem on his hands. He's not "posturing." He's desperate.


It's what you get when you warehouse 8 million people in that small an area.

.
 
I doubt he has the right to do that, sounds unconstitutional to me. IMHO, this is political posturing in opposition to Trump's attempts to get the country and economy moving again as soon as possible. I gotta say though, that this is a stark reminder to be careful who you vote for.
Mayor DeBlasio still has a real problem on his hands. He's not "posturing." He's desperate.

Old Lady can hate Trump and also call out DeBlasio. It’s amazing more of you liberals can’t reconcile Trump hate and bad actions by liberals in your brains.
I was sympathizing with him, actually. But you're right I'm no fan of his.
 

Forum List

Back
Top