No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers *** No Politics
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6880363
05/23/20 12:46 PM
05/23/20 12:46 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2,469
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2,469
Beatrice, NE
I can't disagree with any of that Kieth. Well put. My problem is when the government.mandates that you cannot go to church. Then, at least to me, it's time for some civil disobedience, specifically to show the governors that we won't be told not to go church, for any reason what so ever. There's a big difference between choosing not to do something, and being forced not to do it by the strong hand of government. I don't think it's ever a good idea to let government officials think they can tell people not to go to church. It sends the wrong message, and just rubs me the wrong way.

Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6880379
05/23/20 01:16 PM
05/23/20 01:16 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,500
Armpit, ak
D
Dirt Offline
trapper
Dirt  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,500
Armpit, ak
I beleive that most government bans are on gathering sizes, not necessarily religious gatherings?


Who is John Galt?
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6880387
05/23/20 01:22 PM
05/23/20 01:22 PM
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2,469
Beatrice, NE
L
loosegoose Offline
trapper
loosegoose  Offline
trapper
L

Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 2,469
Beatrice, NE
At least here, there is both. No more that 10 people (still), and, up until a couple weeks ago, no church services. Now there's church allowed, but with all kinds of rules, including rules that forbid what some churches believe to be holy sacraments.

Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: warrior] #6881428
05/24/20 09:59 PM
05/24/20 09:59 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
Originally Posted by warrior
Originally Posted by James
Thank you, loosegoose. Good post, though I think Trump's using the JD to fight for churches may itself be a violation of the First Amendment. I expect the Supreme Court might just toss this one to the states.

Of course, the courts won't have the matter settled until after the election. Canny politics, actually. Cynical, though.

Jim


Really, a classic bottom feeder ruse. Claiming to not know case law and precedent. Precedent has repeatedly held the state to the same standards as congress in regards to constitutional law.

But of course were the states allowing voluntary school prayer you would argue the complete opposite, when 1A clearly says shall not establish or prohibit.

You can't have it both ways, Karen.


A classic half-wit response. Of course the Court has held that the First Amendment applies to the states. But that's not the issue I was addressing. When there's a pandemic, certain civil rights (e.g., freedom of assembly) may be curtailed.

The issue covered by this thread is whether the president has the authority to over-rule what the governors have done. Only the courts can settle that issue. The issue is one of states' rights. Since the pandemic has hit different states differently, I think it should be settled state by state.

Please keep up.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: James] #6881429
05/24/20 10:03 PM
05/24/20 10:03 PM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
W
white marlin Offline
trapper
white marlin  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
Originally Posted by James
When there's a pandemic, certain civil rights (e.g., freedom of assembly) may be curtailed.


that may apply to INFECTED people, but I do not believe (show me if I'm wrong) it has EVER applied to the population at large.

prove me wrong, James.


"We didn't come all the way out here just to 'feel them on the line.' "
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Diggerman] #6881434
05/24/20 10:11 PM
05/24/20 10:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
Originally Posted by Diggerman
Originally Posted by James
What if I see fit to yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre? Or slander somebody?

The First Amendment is not a guarantee of freedom of however you want to worship, no matter how dangerous it is to others.

The amendments to the Constitution aren't absolutes. What about the churches that want to ingest peyote? Jim Jones's church?


Jim

Really, did you actually go to law school? A crowded theater is private property and the owner can restrict your speech any which way he wants. The First amendment Limits the GOVERNMENTS ability to control your speech. Wouldn't it be great if lawyers were actually required to study the Constitution prior to receiving their shingle.


Did you learn to read beyond the third-grade level?

Sure, a property owner can throw you out. Those facts weren't part of my hypothetical.

However, to address your concern, do you suppose you have the right to yell "Fire!" in a public building?

The First Amendment says nothing about government's ability to limit the right to free speech or assembly, yet the courts have developed exceptions to those rights, in cases of insurrection, inciting a mob to violence, or PANDEMIC you may not get your full panoply of civil rights.

If there is a large-scale revolt, and you're captured as a rebel, don't expect to get full due process. You won't get it, and the courts won't try to intervene.

I went to law school and practiced law for 33 years. What are your credentials?

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: white marlin] #6881437
05/24/20 10:14 PM
05/24/20 10:14 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,679
Anchorage, Alaska
Originally Posted by white marlin
Originally Posted by James
When there's a pandemic, certain civil rights (e.g., freedom of assembly) may be curtailed.


that may apply to INFECTED people, but I do not believe (show me if I'm wrong) it has EVER applied to the population at large.

prove me wrong, James.


I couldn't give you an answer without extensive legal research, but I suspect you're wrong.

The government has the right to forcibly quarantine infected people, I think, and I predict they also have the right to limit assembly, in order to prevent spread of the disease.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: James] #6881453
05/24/20 10:32 PM
05/24/20 10:32 PM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,761
NC
B
bowhunter27295 Offline
trapper
bowhunter27295  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 4,761
NC
Originally Posted by James
Every state is different. The virus has impacted states differently. The impact is not uniform across the country.

That being the case, why shouldn't the question of whether to open churches and other places with crowds be a state issue?

What happened to states' rights, you Southerners?

Jim


State's rights are important to republican governors of the south. Not so much with democrat governors of the south. Check that one and get back to us.

Republican examples Georgia and Florida.

Democrat examples Virginia and North Carolina.

I won't even go into the discussion about democrat yankee governors. GOOD GRIEF!!!


The world is full of sheep and wolves.

Be the sheepdog.
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881469
05/24/20 10:46 PM
05/24/20 10:46 PM
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,001
TN/OH
R
RM trapper Offline
trapper
RM trapper  Offline
trapper
R

Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,001
TN/OH
On another note I enjoyed a great service today at our church with 100 other like minded people

Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881482
05/24/20 10:55 PM
05/24/20 10:55 PM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,501
SE Minn
R
Rat Masterson Offline
trapper
Rat Masterson  Offline
trapper
R

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,501
SE Minn
Restricting movement is allowed by the State if a person "may" have the virus. Talk about a gray area, however due process requires that the imposition of a quarantine or an isolation order not be unreasonable, arbitrary or oppressive. Minnesota is running on all three. Not a lawyer but I stayed at a Holiday Inn.

Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: RM trapper] #6881521
05/25/20 01:43 AM
05/25/20 01:43 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 27,442
potter co. p.a.
P
pcr2 Offline
"Twerker"
pcr2  Offline
"Twerker"
P

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 27,442
potter co. p.a.
Originally Posted by RM trapper
On another note I enjoyed a great service today at our church with 100 other like minded people

MAGA


Elno's 5 hole golf course and yatch club

Team Savell
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881523
05/25/20 02:01 AM
05/25/20 02:01 AM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,111
Northeast Oklahoma
M
Mike in A-town Offline
trapper
Mike in A-town  Offline
trapper
M

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,111
Northeast Oklahoma
So if the need (or fear) is great enough the Bill of Rights just goes out the window?

So FDR and the government were correct in relocating and confining Japanese Nisei and German Americans during arguably one of the greatest crises in our country's history?

If that's the case then anybody with two brain cells to rub together would just manufacture a crisis (or exploit an existing one) to sidestep that pesky Constitution. Hmmm...

Either people have inherent rights or they don't...

Which is it councilor?

BTW, the whole "rights aren't absolute/can't yell fire in a crowded theater" argument is weak, tired, and used to support every asinine statist argument ever... We didn't outlaw speaking in public over those incidents. We just made it clear that you are responsible for the consequences of your actions. It's the exact same argument I have heard time and again from gun control advocates... They're all for curtailing rights until I suggest that we limit speech to a certain decibel level or limit their capacity to no more than 10 spoken words per minute ( 7 in New York ) or that they must register their speech with the local constabulary before giving it and can only give 1 speech per month... And only if their local LEO deems it necessary.

But I digress...

Mike


One man with a gun may control 100 others who have none.

Vladimir Lenin
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881524
05/25/20 02:16 AM
05/25/20 02:16 AM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,111
Northeast Oklahoma
M
Mike in A-town Offline
trapper
Mike in A-town  Offline
trapper
M

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 8,111
Northeast Oklahoma
I also find it very ironic that a supporter of the party of abortion-on-demand somehow finds fault with my stance of "my body, my choice" even though my actions may actually effect the health and well being of another human(s)...

You can't make this stuff up.

Mike


One man with a gun may control 100 others who have none.

Vladimir Lenin
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Mike in A-town] #6881540
05/25/20 06:01 AM
05/25/20 06:01 AM
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 2,269
Kansas
P
Pawnee Offline
trapper
Pawnee  Offline
trapper
P

Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 2,269
Kansas
Originally Posted by Mike in A-town
I also find it very ironic that a supporter of the party of abortion-on-demand somehow finds fault with my stance of "my body, my choice" even though my actions may actually effect the health and well being of another human(s)...

You can't make this stuff up.

Mike


Exactly!! Great example. I would also add that I find it fascinating that separation of Church and State only goes one way. They tell us what we can and can’t do, but they have a conniption fit if we even hint at involving something biblical or religious to government.


Hal is my Hero
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881544
05/25/20 06:32 AM
05/25/20 06:32 AM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
W
white marlin Offline
trapper
white marlin  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
Roosevelt authorized Executive Order 9066, issued on February 19, 1942, which allowed regional military commanders to designate "military areas" from which "any or all persons may be excluded."[16] Although the executive order did not mention Japanese Americans, this authority was used to declare that all people of Japanese ancestry were required to leave Alaska[17] and the military exclusion zones from all of California and parts of Oregon, Washington, and Arizona, except for those in government camps.[18] Internment was not limited to those of Japanese ancestry, but included a relatively smaller number—though still totalling well over ten thousand—of people of German and Italian ancestry and Germans deported from Latin America to the U.S.[19]:124 [20] Approximately 5,000 Japanese Americans relocated outside the exclusion zone before March 1942,[21] while some 5,500 community leaders had been arrested immediately after the Pearl Harbor attack and thus were already in custody.[22]
The United States Census Bureau assisted the internment efforts by providing specific individual census data on Japanese Americans. The Bureau denied its role for decades despite scholarly evidence to the contrary,[23] and its role became more widely acknowledged by 2007.[24][25] In 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the removal by ruling against Fred Korematsu's appeal for violating an exclusion order.[26] The Court limited its decision to the validity of the exclusion orders,


James, I guess you would have no issue with this.

perhaps a Round Two is in order, for certain communities.

Last edited by white marlin; 05/25/20 06:57 AM.

"We didn't come all the way out here just to 'feel them on the line.' "
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Mike in A-town] #6881546
05/25/20 06:37 AM
05/25/20 06:37 AM
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
W
white marlin Offline
trapper
white marlin  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,369
SW PA
Originally Posted by Mike in A-town
So if the need (or fear) is great enough the Bill of Rights just goes out the window?

So FDR and the government were correct in relocating and confining Japanese Nisei and German Americans during arguably one of the greatest crises in our country's history?

If that's the case then anybody with two brain cells to rub together would just manufacture a crisis (or exploit an existing one) to sidestep that pesky Constitution. Hmmm...

Either people have inherent rights or they don't...

Which is it councilor?

BTW, the whole "rights aren't absolute/can't yell fire in a crowded theater" argument is weak, tired, and used to support every asinine statist argument ever... We didn't outlaw speaking in public over those incidents. We just made it clear that you are responsible for the consequences of your actions. It's the exact same argument I have heard time and again from gun control advocates... They're all for curtailing rights until I suggest that we limit speech to a certain decibel level or limit their capacity to no more than 10 spoken words per minute ( 7 in New York ) or that they must register their speech with the local constabulary before giving it and can only give 1 speech per month... And only if their local LEO deems it necessary.

But I digress...

Mike


BRILLIANT!

and I would LOVE to hear James' rebuttal. but, I won't hold my breath...he will either ignore or sidestep this logical argument.

(btw...we should ban lawyers from serving in any public office)

Last edited by white marlin; 05/25/20 07:24 AM.

"We didn't come all the way out here just to 'feel them on the line.' "
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: KeithC] #6881594
05/25/20 08:05 AM
05/25/20 08:05 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,458
La Vernia & Dallas TX
Mark June Offline
trapper
Mark June  Offline
trapper

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,458
La Vernia & Dallas TX
Originally Posted by KeithC
I believe that churches should have been allowed to stay open. I don't think it was legal for the government to close them.

I also believe that the pastors should have decided to close them

The whole debate reminds me of the temptation of Christ by the devil. In the Book of Matthew:

"5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."

I think failing to protect the members of your congregation from Covid-19 is tempting the Lord thy God.

I similarly think that it is not a sign of weakness or submission for the strong to protect the weak by doing what they can to prevent the spread of Covid-19. Choosing to wear a mask and maintaining social distancing does not mean you are a weak willed follower. It mainly means that you have a heart and care about protecting the weaker members of society, such as the elderly, the sick and the infants.

I believe the Christian God would want you to do what you can to protect others. He can see, hear and know you wherever you are.

Keith


Thoughtful post KeithC. It's always hard to make righteous decisions (I think that's what you're describing) because we are not God, but we are called to be perfect as the Father in Heaven is perfect, so just as we should try our best to be salt and light for the glory of God.

Thanks for the post.
Blessings,
Mark


Dallas Theological Seminary Class of 2023
motto: "Preach the Word"
https://www.markjuneslures.com/
Professional Predator Trapping Academy Host



Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: James] #6881619
05/25/20 08:33 AM
05/25/20 08:33 AM
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,757
Pottawatamie co. IA
LLtrapper Offline
"The Coon Combine"
LLtrapper  Offline
"The Coon Combine"

Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,757
Pottawatamie co. IA
Originally Posted by James
What if I see fit to yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre? Or slander somebody?

The First Amendment is not a guarantee of freedom of however you want to worship, no matter how dangerous it is to others.

The amendments to the Constitution aren't absolutes. What about the churches that want to ingest peyote? Jim Jones's church?


Jim


Church has been open hear for three weeks. Incubation of covid 19 is a week or two. Cases here are going down like a rock. As for the danger to a person of faith, we know our risks and can decide for ourselves. We do not need politicians, judges or lawyers deciding how our rights that are not man given are to be handed out.

As for endangering others, if you do not want or wish to go to church, stay home. How are you going to get infected if you are at home? LLL


Market analysis and marketing advice free. PM for info.:)
Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: LLtrapper] #6881629
05/25/20 08:58 AM
05/25/20 08:58 AM
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,458
La Vernia & Dallas TX
Mark June Offline
trapper
Mark June  Offline
trapper

Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,458
La Vernia & Dallas TX
Originally Posted by LLtrapper
Originally Posted by James
What if I see fit to yell "fire!" in a crowded theatre? Or slander somebody?

The First Amendment is not a guarantee of freedom of however you want to worship, no matter how dangerous it is to others.

The amendments to the Constitution aren't absolutes. What about the churches that want to ingest peyote? Jim Jones's church?


Jim


Church has been open hear for three weeks. Incubation of covid 19 is a week or two. Cases here are going down like a rock. As for the danger to a person of faith, we know our risks and can decide for ourselves. We do not need politicians, judges or lawyers deciding how our rights that are not man given are to be handed out.

As for endangering others, if you do not want or wish to go to church, stay home. How are you going to get infected if you are at home? LLL


Our forefathers believed, conceived, prayed, and wrote up articles of a nation under God's providence. Many were deists but they did believe in God, the Father, Son, and Spirit.
Now, with our non-Christian nation, deemed by most historical theologians as having had the final nail pounded into Christianity during the 1960's, we as a nation turn to humankind for providence and grace.

frown


Dallas Theological Seminary Class of 2023
motto: "Preach the Word"
https://www.markjuneslures.com/
Professional Predator Trapping Academy Host



Re: POTUS Churchs [Re: Newt] #6881700
05/25/20 10:21 AM
05/25/20 10:21 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,977
East-Central Wisconsin
B
bblwi Offline
trapper
bblwi  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,977
East-Central Wisconsin
Now religion has become very political, either supposedly for or against. We now have government either closing churches or stating that in the opinion of the government religion is an essential service to the whole nation. So much for separation of church and state. We best be careful if we determine that church is essential then the government will become involved in administrating and regulation, who knows they may even decide to tax them.

Bryce

Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread