The Church Vs. The State Civil Disobedience

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

To me what some see as civil disobedience of churches holding large gatherings right now comes from a place of selfishness, not concern for others. I see civil disobedience or similar actions as being something that is concerned for the wellbeing of the community. I don't believe that holding large gatherings right now accomplishes that.
For many the only community they have is the church. For others the church being open feels like a safe harbor when other instituitions will turn them away. If people can gather safely in bars and at ski hill and at superstores ... why can they not do that safely in church communities. This far into this 'emergeny' event we know what works and what does not work ... lockdowns have not worked ... unless you call delaying the inevitible working.
 
For many the only community they have is the church. For others the church being open feels like a safe harbor when other instituitions will turn them away

How open is open? It sounds like you're saying the churches need to be open all the time. Just clarifying here.

If people can gather safely in bars and at ski hill and at superstores ... why can they not do that safely in church communities

I don't like this argument. It feels like an apples to oranges thing to me. Nevertheless, I believe churches can find ways to minister safely. BC restaurants and businesses had to show they had a plan to operate safely. I see no reason why churches couldn't be able to do that too.

The difference is that the churches in Chilliwack and Alberta are not even making an attempt to take the public health measures into consideration. That's what is selfish to me.

I've seen some very cool adaptations to this situation. Some will continue when we can go back to whatever normal is. It truly sucks that we have to make so many changes. That being said, there's enough evidence to show what happens when we gather in large groups during this time. I'm willing to continue to follow guidelines. For now anyway.

This far into this 'emergeny' event we know what works and what does not work ... lockdowns have not worked ... unless you call delaying the inevitible working.

Leaving things the way they were without any public health measures would have also had devastating effects, including on the economy. We do know what works, that's why the measures are being taken.
 
For the record, deaths by suicide in Alberta were (according to early numbers) DOWN in 2020 despite what peolpe wanted to claim. OVerdoses did seem to spike in multiple provinces

 
Leaving things the way they were without any public health measures would have also had devastating effects, including on the economy
I don't think anyone is protesting all public health measures. Just the proven to cause more harm than good ones.
 
Could it be that they were not all accidental ... in other words ... suicidal overdoses.

The thing with opiate related deaths is it's not always clear. It's a terrible tragic crisis that isn't a simple answer to fix. Most "solutions" are downstream responses when more systemic fixes need to happen. The pandemic certainly doesn't help. It may not harm in the ways that seem to be.
 
For the record, deaths by suicide in Alberta were (according to early numbers) DOWN in 2020 despite what peolpe wanted to claim. OVerdoses did seem to spike in multiple provinces

Keep in mind there are deaths that are not referred to or recorded as suicides anymore, as they once were. There will be more of those coming. Possibly a lot more. Quite probably, several more than we will know for at least two years. We have no way of knowing how many people checked out early because their doctors made a case for “reasonably foreseeable” death, even if they had some reasonably foreseeable years of life left. We don’t know even know who is overseeing those forms after they’re filed, and how they will interpret ambiguity - will it lean in favour of protecting medical staff, because they patients are no longer alive to assess whether they could’ve lived for several years longer, and so better to give doctors and nurses the benefit of the doubt (do people realize how dangerous that could be)? Those in nursing homes, homeless and/ or precariously housed, those who just found it too hard to tough this out. And soon they won’t even have to make a “reasonably foreseeable” case, and it will only require one witness (who can now be a paid staff or healthcare worker where the balance of power is skewed), no reflection period. Of course, no family intervention required. There may be deaths that were recorded as neither suicides, nor covid deaths. I wonder if these numerical reports are ignoring other “columns” where more numbers might be found. Yes, I know it sounds like what the covid deniers say about covid...that the numbers are suspect. But in this case we know that there are deaths that are not referred to as suicide anymore - MAiD deaths are higher than anticipated, even of those that we know about - and we need to remember that.


(this is relevant. It doesn’t belong in another thread.)
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind there are deaths that are not referred to or recorded as suicides anymore, as they once were. There will be more of those coming. Possibly a lot more. Quite probably, several more than we will know for at least two years. We have no way of knowing how many people checked out early because their doctors made a case for “reasonably foreseeable” death, even if they had some reasonably foreseeable years of life left. We don’t know even know who is overseeing those forms after they’re filed, and how they will interpret ambiguity - will it lean in favour of protecting medical staff, because they patients are no longer alive to assess whether they could’ve lived for several years longer, and so better to give doctors and nurses the benefit of the doubt (do people realize how dangerous that could be)? Those in nursing homes, homeless and/ or precariously housed, those who just found it too hard to tough this out. And soon they won’t even have to make a “reasonably foreseeable” case, and it will only require one witness (who can now be a paid staff or healthcare worker where the balance of power is skewed), no reflection period. Of course, no family intervention required. There may be deaths that were recorded as neither suicides, nor covid deaths. I wonder if these numerical reports are ignoring other “columns” where more numbers might be found. Yes, I know it sounds like what the covid deniers say about covid...that the numbers are suspect. But in this case we know that there are deaths that are not referred to as suicide anymore - MAiD deaths are higher than anticipated, even of those that we know about - and we need to remember that.


(this is relevant. It doesn’t belong in another thread.)
*correction they still have to make a reasonably foreseeable case for dying patients but now that non dying people are allowed to be killed, that shifts the importance of accuracy about the reasonably foreseeable. So, doctors and nurses who don’t save lives of those not actually dying will more likely face discipline, if any at all, for putting people on the wrong “track” - and so that the error will be that they died in under 90 days - administrative error, not murder.

And I guess it’s up to Rita if these posts of mine are too off topic. The thread meandered with the suicide report comment, so, I was responding to that.
 
Last edited:
I am always in favor of connecting all the dots ... @Kimmio Laughterlove I am ever suspicious of how the MSM continues to downplay any news about collateral damages ... to over sensationalize the Covid threat. Shocking stuff the more you look into it the more you find it being swept under the carpet.
 
There are always those into dissociation of things in the quantum world said to be all relative ... expect wrinkles from all sides ...
 
This thread has been a bit of a s-show from the get go so I am not even sure what is the topic anymore. *shrug*
 
This thread has been a bit of a s-show from the get go so I am not even sure what is the topic anymore. *shrug*

Chaos is persistent due to the great wish to not know ... thus we don't!

It is determined as conclusive ... but really not all that determinate given all the uncertainties!
 
Church and State are like the right and left hands of the human body. They are different and yet animated by our one life. Cooperating they may obtain much good. By cooperating I do not mean collusion. Each must establish and maintain distinct objectives.

The State is charged with the maintenance of communal law and order.

The Church is charged with the maintenance of personal meaning and purpose.

Where either crosses the boundary between them confusion follows. That confusion leads to conflict and anxiety.

I have resisted the error of both Church and State for all of my adult life. For this I have been shunned and shamed by various persons and groups. That has done nothing to diminish my resistant posture.
 
The State is charged with the maintenance of communal law and order.

The Church is charged with the maintenance of personal meaning and purpose.

I don't think it helps if you dualize this.

If a person behaves badly because of personal history/mental illness, etc., you need the state to help make rules around how you contain the behaviour until the helping part, "church", "medicine", "healing" can kick in. It's not seamless, the boundaries are not clear.

And sometimes you resist the state, and sometimes it is right, and sometimes one is wrong, and discovers that later.
 
Back
Top