Trump says Church essential, open them up

[Calminian]

I just got a gleeful notice from my Pastor. We're opening! He thanked the President. I've heard from many others they've received the same.

“In America We Need More Prayer Not Less!” – BREAKING: President Trump Designates Houses of Worship “Essential” States Must Open Up Houses of Worship THIS WEEKEND!​

Can't help but wonder of governors missed an opportunity here. They could have been the heroes. Instead they sat back and allowed the President to swoop in. Christians and others are going to remember this. Master stroke by the Prez.

 

[Calminian]

oops, just saw a previous thread. my bad. maybe a mod can merge.

 

[KenH]

Christians and others are going to remember this.

“It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man. It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in princes.” - Psalm‬ ‭118:8-9‬ ‭ESV‬‬

 

[Reformed]

While I agree with the President that churches should be open, this is not a federal government issue. Freedom of religion is already protected in the Constitution.

 

[KenH]

While I agree with the President that churches should be open, this is not a federal government issue.

Yep. Tenth amendment. Trump cannot force governors to allow church services. Of course, churches can meet anytime, even if there are consequences. As the hymn says,

“Must I be carried to the skies
On flow’ry beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?”

 

[Calminian]

“It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man. It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in princes.” - Psalm‬ ‭118:8-9‬ ‭ESV‬‬

It's also sinful to be ungrateful like in the debt forgiveness parable.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yep. Tenth amendment. Trump cannot force governors to allow church services. Of course, churches can meet anytime, even if there are consequences. As the hymn says,

“Must I be carried to the skies
On flow’ry beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?”

We are free to assemble and worship per the First Amendment!
And no state can undo the rights expressed in the amendments/Bill of Rights!

 

[Calminian]

Yep. Tenth amendment. Trump cannot force governors to allow church services. Of course, churches can meet anytime, even if there are consequences. As the hymn says,

“Must I be carried to the skies
On flow’ry beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?”

Wow. I'm trying to think of a statement I've heard that's more wrong in a public forum. You don't understand stand our constitution at all.

 

[Yeshua1]

Wow. I'm trying to think of a statement I've heard that's more wrong in a public forum. You don't understand stand our constitution at all.

States cannot undo the Bill of Rights, as we still have same rights, Covid or not!

 

[KenH]

We are free to assemble and worship per the First Amendment!

The federal constitution only applies to the federal government. You have to look to your state’s constitution for non-interference with worship from your state government. I would be surprised if it wasn’t in there.

 

[Salty]

States cannot undo the Bill of Rights, as we still have same rights, Covid or not!

Well, they have been trying - esp the 2nd Amendment.

But when it comes to the 5th amendment........

 

[KenH]

To clarify my position, I do not agree with the use of the Incorporation Doctrine applied by some people to the 14th Amendment. To use this doctrine because one wants to achieve a certain result through federal power also opens the door to the use of the doctrine to achieve results through federal power that I imagine most of us posting in this section of this message board disagree with, e.g., nationwide legalization of abortion and same-sex marriage. Using this doctrine simply results in being hoisted on one’s own petard. I believe we should keep the federal government limited and work through state and local governments to achieve political goals. It is much safer for our liberties overall. It is much easier to move to a different state than to a different country, if one thinks his liberties are being trampled upon by government.

 

[Yeshua1]

To clarify my position, I do not agree with the use of the Incorporation Doctrine applied by some people to the 14th Amendment. To use this doctrine because one wants to achieve a certain result through federal power also opens the door to the use of the doctrine to achieve results through federal power that I imagine most of us posting in this section of this message board disagree with, e.g., nationwide legalization of abortion and same-sex marriage. Using this doctrine simply results in being hoisted on one’s own petard. I believe we should keep the federal government limited and work through state and local governments to achieve political goals. It is much safer for our liberties overall. It is much easier to move to a different state than to a different country, if one thinks his liberties are being trampled upon by government.

Do not the Bill of rights trump state laws then?

 

[KenH]

Do not the Bill of rights trump state laws then?

No, unless you agree with the folks who think that the 14th amendment made that so and thus meant that abortion and same-sex marriage could be made national policy. I do not agree with those folks.

 

[Salty]

No, unless you agree with the folks who think that the 14th amendment made that so and thus meant that abortion and same-sex marriage could be made national policy. I do not agree with those folks.

There is a technicality - the 14th says "All persons Born or Naturalized..." and the unborn - as the name implies has not yet been born.

Now to answer the question in post #13 "Do not the Bill of rights trump state laws then?"

Not only the Bill of rights, but all amendments and the entire Constitution.

 

[KenH]

Not only the Bill of rights, but all amendments and the entire Constitution.

“Despite orthodox legal theory, history proves that incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states was not intended by the 14th Amendment, and in the contemporary federal judges most often use the theory as an excuse to meddle with the internal affairs of the states. In effect, the incorporation doctrine allows federal judges to rule by personal preference rather than original intent. By overriding the independent will of the states, incorporation has effectively transformed the federal judiciary into an oligarchy.”

Antonin Scalia and the Incorporation Doctrine | | Tenth Amendment Center

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

“Despite orthodox legal theory, history proves that incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the states was not intended by the 14th Amendment, and in the contemporary federal judges most often use the theory as an excuse to meddle with the internal affairs of the states. In effect, the incorporation doctrine allows federal judges to rule by personal preference rather than original intent. By overriding the independent will of the states, incorporation has effectively transformed the federal judiciary into an oligarchy.”

Antonin Scalia and the Incorporation Doctrine | | Tenth Amendment Center

Before granting that the premise is correct, I would like to know precisely where and how the “privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” are delineated.