172 Pastors Petition Virginia Governor to Allow Weekly Church Services

After six weeks of not being allowed to gather in church buildings for corporate worship, more than 170 pastors in Virginia are respectfully saying “enough.”

Michael Law Jr., senior pastor of Arlington Baptist Church, emailed a letter Monday to Gov. Ralph Northam asking him to modify two executive orders to allow religious gatherings at least once a week.

Another 171 pastors also signed the letter, which reads in part:

"The Church of the Lord Jesus Christ is a hospital for the spiritually sick. Yet corporate worship services of more than 10 people have been banned in Virginia since March 23. … Prohibiting corporate worship services has exacerbated the sense of sorrow, isolation, and fear felt by so many citizens across the Commonwealth."

On March 23, Northam issued Executive Order 53, which prohibits “all public and private in person gatherings of 10 or more individuals.”

The Democratic governor followed with Executive Order 55, which specifically prohibits “religious, or other social events, whether they occur indoor or outdoor.”

The second order says it is slated to “remain in full force and in effect until June 10, 2020, unless amended or rescinded by further executive order.” 

The aim of the pastors’ letter is for churches to “have the freedom to be able to wisely gather again,” David Schrock, pastor for preaching and theology at Occoquan Bible Church in Woodbridge, Virginia, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Wednesday.

Law, Schrock, and about 30 of the other pastors are with churches in Northern Virginia, which in general is the most liberal area of the state. Its population growth spurred Virginia’s switch in recent years from a reliably Republican state in presidential elections to a Democratic one.

The pastors who signed hope that their colleagues throughout Virginia will add their names to the petition urging Northam to amend his orders.

Law begins the appeal by thanking Northam for his work during the COVID-19 pandemic to protect Virginians and tells the governor that pastors in the Commonwealth “have been praying for you.”

Law then outlines a formal biblical and practical argument for why the pastors believe that churches should be permitted to assemble again:

Because corporate worship is central to Christian life, it is extraordinary for churches to forego meeting for even a single Sunday. Thus, with each passing week that corporate worship is banned, the government pushes Christians closer to the point where they must choose to sin against God and conscience or violate the law.

Northam is a member of First Baptist Church in Capeville, a predominantly black church on Virginia’s Eastern Shore.

The Daily Signal sought comment Thursday from the governor’s press office but had received no response by publication time.

Schrock, who said he wasn’t aware of a response from Northam, stressed why he chose to add his name to the pastors’ formal request to the governor.

“The church is a witness for the resurrection of Jesus Christ,” he said. “That is why we gather on Sunday, because that was the day that he was raised from the dead. And it gives a public testimony to the fact that he is alive and present to help all who trust in him.”

In addition to the biblical call to gather as believers, Schrock said, there “is both a psychological and a spiritual well-being that the church provides to those who are followers of Jesus Christ.”

“It seems like that would be a statewide concern, for the physical, the psychological, the spiritual well-being of all citizens of Virginia,” he said.

Although most churches have continued to conduct services, prayer meetings, and other activities online, Schrock said, “there are many things that the Bible instructs believers to do that cannot be done online.”

Many denominations believe Christians should partake in communion only when the church is publicly assembled, Schrock said. The command in Hebrews 10: 24-25 to “assemble for worship” is central to the Christian faith, he said, as noted in the letter to Northam.

“It comes down to the free exercise of our conscience, to be able to exercise our beliefs as the Bible teaches,” Schrock said. “And the letter underscores why there are certain things that cannot be done online and cannot be done just as individuals.”

On Monday, the same day the pastors emailed their petition to Northam, the governor said during a press conference that Virginia might begin to reopen businesses as early as next week as a part of a three-phase plan. 

“You will still be safer at home,” Northam said as he began his outline of phase one. “Large gatherings are still a bad idea. It means continued social distancing, teleworking, and face coverings.”

“But it also means that we are moving forward,” the governor said. “Phase one includes guidelines for all businesses to enhance physical distancing, do more cleaning and disinfecting, and promote workplace safety.”

It’s not clear what Northam’s announcement regarding the phased reopening means for church gatherings. The plan does propose to ease “limits on businesses and faith communities,” but gatherings remain limited to 10 or fewer in phase one and 50 or fewer in phase two.

With churches across Virginia nearing the two-month mark since their last in-person services, Law’s letter implores the governor “to modify Executive Orders 53 and 55 to permit—at minimum—once-weekly gatherings by religious organizations, provided reasonable public-health precautions are taken.”

SOURCE 





Gouge Is Good

If you’ve bought anything in the past six weeks, you’ve seen shortages.  In grocery stores, you’ve see empty shelves.  Online, you’ve seen long waits.

If you know econ 101, there’s an obvious explanation: price-gouging laws.  When supply falls, the market’s normal reaction is to raise prices.  Government’s reaction, however, is to paint the market’s normal reaction as vicious exploitation – and order prices to stay flat despite reduced supply.  Shortages inevitably result.

While this story has great merit, you don’t have to look closely to realize that it’s not the full story of shortages.  Why not?  Because most businesses are neglecting a wide range of strategies to legally raise prices.   These strategies include:

1. Stop offering discounts. This is legally very safe, but the last time I shopped at Giant and Costco.com, many discounts remained.  At least at Giant, the discounts were on perishable goods, so this isn’t just a leftover from before the crisis.  Firms really do continue to sell below full price even when goods are flying off the shelves.  Why not just charge full price on every good in short supply?

2. Offer premium service. Stores can’t legally charge more for the same good.  Yet to the best of my knowledge, there is no legal impediment to offering a new good or service at a high price.  For example, stores could charge an entry fee or surcharge for shopping right after delivery trucks arrive.  (If that’s too blatant, they could just arrange for trucks to arrive right before the premium period).  Slight variation: Offer pricey preferred customer cards, so high-value customers don’t have to pay extra each time they shop.  My local bike shop sticks to a first-come-first-served model, so there are long lines for service.  They could easily offer “elite” or “platinum” or “preferred” drop-off service for double the price.

3. Impose (or raise) minimum purchase requirements.  Right now, there is a long wait for Instacart delivery in my area.  But you only have to order $50 to get delivery.  Why not a minimum order of $100?  $200?  Amazon, similarly, could limit two-day shipping to high-value orders.

4. Mandatory tipping.  Most delivery services strongly encourage or even require a tip.  Instacart, for example, has a built-in 5% tip.  They could easily raise it to 20% – then marginally cut delivery workers’ base pay so the company profits.

Why then don’t businesses apply these strategies until shortages vanish?  The usual story is that they’re guarding their reputation.  Economically illiterate customers see shortages as forgivable but price increases as vicious.  Profit-maximizing firms therefore appease them.  If customers feel like Costco is ripping them off during the crisis, Costco suffers in the long-run from loss of goodwill.

This story, too, has great merit.  But again, I doubt it’s the full story.  Beloved, high-profile companies like Costco might be acting prudently; when your reputation is solid-gold, you really don’t want to risk a media scandal.  But even a well-known firm like Giant could easily end most discounts without drawing much ire.  A newish firm like Instacart that’s exploding during this crisis could easily get away with high mandatory tips.  New customers won’t even realize that anything has changed.  And does anyone really expect my bike shop to suffer in the long-run if they offer premium drop-off service?

What then explains the legal and profitable price increases that aren’t happening?  My preferred explanation is that businesspeople – like most people – consider price increases during an emergency to be dishonorable.  And contrary to popular belief, the system generally puts fairly honorable businesspeople in charge.  The adage, “That’s just not good business” means a lot to the typical person who runs a business.  That’s why they try to make customers happy even when they know that repeat business is highly unlikely.

During normal times, businesspeople’s sense of honor helps the whole economic system run smoothly.  In a crisis, however, businesspeople’s own misplaced sense of honor prevents them from swiftly alleviating shortages with covert price increases.  Yes, price-gouging laws and customer outrage are important factors, too.  But if businesspeople felt morally justified in raising prices, they would be aggressively hunting for legal and psychological loopholes.  Few are.

SOURCE 






What's the Real Story Behind Continuing Lockdowns?

In March, Americans started to stay at home in what began as a voluntary movement. Governments issued lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, but Americans understood the threat of the Wuhan Chinese coronavirus from China was significant enough to take drastic measures. Thanks to these measures, America’s health care system was not overwhelmed by the global pandemic, and Americans across the country are demanding an end to the lockdowns.

Embattled Democratic governors are defending extended coronavirus lockdowns by citing the all-important “science.” Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.), for example, told CNN, “The fact of the matter is, we’re in a global pandemic. This isn’t something we just negotiate ourselves out of and it’s a political matter. … I am going to continue to do my job regardless of what tweets come out or what polls come out or what people think makes sense. We’re going to listen to facts and science because we’ve got to get this right.”

This is a tremendous dodge. Lockdowns are a fundamentally political decision. When medical professionals insist that people wash their hands and avoid large gatherings, they provide an important service. When the government tells citizens they cannot leave their homes, go to work, go to church, or get a haircut, however, it is going beyond the bounds of medical science.

Governors justified the lockdowns by focusing on “flattening the curve.” That meant slowing the transmission of the disease to prevent the kind of medical-system collapse experienced in Wuhan and Northern Italy. This goal has arguably been achieved. New York did not run out of ventilators. The U.S.N.S. Comfort left New York harbor recently. Over the weekend, the city’s health system announced that it could finally kick out the Samaritan’s Purse relief hospital which served more than 300 coronavirus patients — one day after the City Council spokesman condemned the Christian organization as “hateful.”

Early estimates of the COVID-19 death rate, cited to justify the lockdowns, have proven far too pessimistic. In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated a 3.4 percent fatality rate and Dr. Anthony Fauci estimated that the fatality rate of the coronavirus was about 2 percent. As PJ Media’s Matt Margolis reported, at least five studies have placed the death rate below 1 percent, confirming President Donald Trump’s hunch.

Recent studies have found that far more people than expected have COVID-19 antibodies — meaning the virus has spread faster than previously thought, but also proving that it is far less deadly than previously thought.

Furthermore, a recent study showed that Democratic governors were three times more likely than Republican governors to impose a lockdown. This would make sense, given the Democratic control over many population centers experiencing large outbreaks: New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C., for example. However, the study found that “counterintuitively, the percentage of the state’s population infected with COVID-19 had the weakest effect on the governors’ decisions of all the four variables.”

The study found that the three most significant variables were political affiliation (a heavy slant toward Democrats), “social learning” (governors of states afflicted by COVID-19 later acted much faster than governors of states who were afflicted early on), and “mini-cascades” (the actions of some governors sparked multiple other governors to order lockdowns in the next three days).

Both social learning and mini-cascades shine a light on how news of the coronavirus’ danger spread. As states with coronavirus hot spots reacted, other states followed suit, preparing for outbreaks of their own.

Yet the political slant is also extremely significant, especially considering the different ways state and local officials have carried out their lockdowns. Greenville, Miss. Mayor Errick Simmons notoriously defended his ban on drive-in church services that led to parishioners facing $500 fines. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio threatened to “permanently” close churches and synagogues unless they comply with his orders — and he issued a disgusting threat to the Jewish community in particular. Andy Berke, mayor of Chattanooga, Tenn., banned drive-in church services even though Tennessee’s governor permitted them. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear dispatched the State Police against a church hosting a drive-in service. Police in Virginia threatened a pastor with a year in jail for hosting a socially-distanced church service, enacting Gov. Ralph Northam’s order.

All these political leaders belong to the same party: the Democratic Party. Not all of the onerous coronavirus restrictions that violate religious freedom have been issued by Democrats, but there is a disturbing correlation between the left-wing party and crisis orders that single out churches, synagogues, and mosques. It seems one party is more likely than the other to think of religion as less than “essential,” and much of that animus traces back to the mistaken idea that religion (Christianity in particular) and science are in conflict.

Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress repeatedly obstructed relief efforts in an attempt to push their pet projects and never let a good crisis go to waste. Presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has called the coronavirus crisis a “wake-up call” on climate change and an “opportunity” for “structural change” on voting and climate change.

Liberals often use “science” as a talking-point to advocate their agendas, even if those agendas arguably conflict with the best science (see abortion, climate predictions, and transgender activism). It appears the tide of science is turning on coronavirus lockdowns, and Democrats are not adjusting with it. As Republicans suggest plans to slowly reopen America while preserving tight social-distancing measures, Democrats insist that the full lockdowns must continue.

While the lockdowns began as a public health measure, their continued extension appears to have more to do with power than safety.

Take Whitmer for instance. Michigan’s governor has decreed that stores cannot sell gardening supplies and she has forbidden people from traveling between homes that they own.

On Thursday, Whitmer sought to extend her emergency declaration, the legal grounds for her tyrannical stay-at-home orders. As Michiganders flocked to Lansing to protest, Republicans in the state legislature refused to grant the governor her extension. She responded by making another emergency declaration herself, attempting to override the legislature.

But sure, her restrictions are all about “science.” No power or politics to see here. Move along.

SOURCE 






Australia: Privacy advocates not paranoid

Those who have expressed privacy concerns about COVIDSafe have been mocked and dismissed. But these concerns are valid. After all, government has spent years warning us about online privacy.

Last year, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Digital Platforms Inquiry concluded, “consumers are generally not aware of the extent of data that is collected nor how it is collected.”

Back in 2013, then Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus asked for an inquiry into online privacy because of technological growth and “changing community conceptions of privacy.”

Internationally, Facebook, and Google have faced enormous fines for privacy breaches — $5 billion and $170 million respectively.

The Cambridge Analytica scandal saw Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg hauled before a Senate Committee to answer questions about invasion of privacy and electoral interference.

These initiatives were spearheaded by governments — because they believed the public were being deceived by Silicon Valley, which was breaching the public’s trust.

Now government is asking us to trust them with our data.

Compared to Google and Facebook, the government app COVIDSafe does collect extraordinarily little data. The app asks only for your first name, postcode, and telephone number; and uses Bluetooth – not GPS – to register close contacts.

To safeguard privacy, the Morrison Government has introduced legislation to ensure the app is only used for its stated purpose, and that police and security agencies do not have access.

But this may not be sufficient.. Legal experts have warned the US government could gain access to the data — because the app data is stored on US company Amazon’s servers.

Furthermore, unlike private companies such as Facebook and Google, the government could potentially use the app as a form of coercion. Business groups have already suggested downloading the app should be a requirement to enter pubs, restaurants, and shops.

After dangling the juicy carrot of COVIDSafe as a way to end the lockdown so we can ‘go to the footy’,  it is not unimaginable government would make having the app a condition of entry to businesses or events.

Hopefully, we can install enough safeguards so COVIDSafe is not misused.

Privacy advocates are not paranoid, we are simply attuned to a threat the government pointed out.

SOURCE  

******************************

Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here. 

************************************