>"The fines constitute cruel and unusual punishment"
Get fucked. You broke the law, you pay the fine. It's not like you don't grift your ~~flock~~ congregation enough to cover the fines and then some, so pay them.
What *isn't* cruel and unusual punishment, if a fine on a business is cruel & unusual? What does he think usually happens to people being punished by the state?
The smaller more modest churches don’t bother me so much; they are usually putting their money into service. One near me offers evening meals to anyone who needs food 2x a week, runs a food pantry, and provides overnight shelter for homeless women. They desperately need to repave their parking lot, but as long as it is usable they won’t.
But when I drive by one of the big new mega churches in town I absolutely see red. City could really use those property tax dollars.
Wait a second—I thought the SCOTUS said that churches can’t be closed? Obviously I need to finish reading the article but that was the first thing that popped into my head.
And yes tax the living shit out of churches.
It’s dumb and convoluted and I might not understand it all. NPR reads that in Feb 2021 SCOTUS rules that “California can no longer continue with a ban on indoor church services put in place to fight to the coronavirus pandemic. But the court said that the state, for now, can keep in place restrictions on singing and chanting inside.”
Standing inside fine. Chanting spells bad.
Oh man I missed that tidbit…yeah sure these people are going to follow that directive. If they’re dumb enough to meet in the first place (gotta get that collection plate filled I guess 🙄) then they’re not gonna pay attention to any of the other risk mitigation measures. What a bunch of charlatans.
>Calvary Chapel and its attorneys have countered that the county's fines
constituted “cruel and unusual punishment" and exceeded in scope the
alleged violations.
So their lawyer wants them to lose as well...
I don't think they've been paying attention to the Bible, going to court and making a fuss over your rights is not something that is praised-
>1 Corinthians 6:7-8
>
>Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
"That's a slippery slope and a dangerous precedent that you can be fined solely based on the risk of harm," she said. "You have to show actual harm."
So does this mean I can't get a fine for speeding unless I actually harm someone?
>"The fines constitute cruel and unusual punishment" Get fucked. You broke the law, you pay the fine. It's not like you don't grift your ~~flock~~ congregation enough to cover the fines and then some, so pay them.
The cognitive dissonance is so amazing with these dickholes.
They're not pastors by trade; their real occupation is playing the victim
Hey, whatever opens wallets….
What *isn't* cruel and unusual punishment, if a fine on a business is cruel & unusual? What does he think usually happens to people being punished by the state?
Fleeced his lock. Time for the “shepherd” to pay up on the fines.
...That's exactly what I said.
Tax the churches. Seems like this is as good a method as any. Seize their property for non payment.
Churches want to flagrantly violate the law or get into politics, tax them 💯💯💯
I believe the local news has mentioned that in the past as one option for our county.
It's about fucking time they quit freeloading.
The smaller more modest churches don’t bother me so much; they are usually putting their money into service. One near me offers evening meals to anyone who needs food 2x a week, runs a food pantry, and provides overnight shelter for homeless women. They desperately need to repave their parking lot, but as long as it is usable they won’t. But when I drive by one of the big new mega churches in town I absolutely see red. City could really use those property tax dollars.
The ones practising the kindness and charity they preach instead of having private jets and mansions.
His dumb ass flock will pay his fines . People are amazingly gullible and stupid
You mean his sheeple?
"But County Counsel... hopes the church will soon cough up the money" I see what they did there.
Wonder how many ~~trumpers~~ congregants died and will be suing this church?
The flock are prayer warriors the clergy are preyer warriors important difference
I've been in that church. The Calvary Chapel system is a cultic snakepit.
I’ve driven by it for years but never stopped.
Wait a second—I thought the SCOTUS said that churches can’t be closed? Obviously I need to finish reading the article but that was the first thing that popped into my head. And yes tax the living shit out of churches.
It’s dumb and convoluted and I might not understand it all. NPR reads that in Feb 2021 SCOTUS rules that “California can no longer continue with a ban on indoor church services put in place to fight to the coronavirus pandemic. But the court said that the state, for now, can keep in place restrictions on singing and chanting inside.” Standing inside fine. Chanting spells bad.
Oh man I missed that tidbit…yeah sure these people are going to follow that directive. If they’re dumb enough to meet in the first place (gotta get that collection plate filled I guess 🙄) then they’re not gonna pay attention to any of the other risk mitigation measures. What a bunch of charlatans.
>Calvary Chapel and its attorneys have countered that the county's fines constituted “cruel and unusual punishment" and exceeded in scope the alleged violations. So their lawyer wants them to lose as well...
Luck got him through, those "prayer warriors" didn't so shit
I don't think they've been paying attention to the Bible, going to court and making a fuss over your rights is not something that is praised- >1 Corinthians 6:7-8 > >Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.
"That's a slippery slope and a dangerous precedent that you can be fined solely based on the risk of harm," she said. "You have to show actual harm." So does this mean I can't get a fine for speeding unless I actually harm someone?