Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[Chip Chipperson]

You know it was literally *illegal to go to church* in many parts of the country for the better part of a year, right?

And yet it wasn't illegal to worship. The church my mother attends (and helped run for several years) set up streaming sessions with dial-in options for those members without internet access/abilities and then set up outdoor services when the weather was nice. When it got cold again, they switched back to video services. At no point did any of the restrictions that prevented them from having indoor services ever prevent them from holding services at all. The adapted for the greater good and didn't pretend they were victims. Nobody ever claimed that dealing with a pandemic would be easy, but for some reason there are plenty of people who think only others should be impacted by it.

You said you don't care if having no restrictions meant that 10 million people died. Well guess what? The impact on the economy that the lockdowns and restrictions have had would pale in comparison to the disaster that would have unfolded in your scenario.

 

[LittleBuford]

I get it, you're not religious.

And not everyone who is religious disagrees with the restrictions. I'm sure God cares more about people's wellbeing than He does about their ability to worship in groups.

 

[LittleBuford]

And let me add that churches aren't the only places of worship affected.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I get it, you're not religious.

Either way, "illegal to gather in large groups" is just as bad, even if church had nothing to do with it. Free association and freedom of exercise are BOTH bedrock enumerated rights.

I am religious, and I found other ways to practice my faith this year that didn't involve endangering my or my fellow parishioners' health. And our church was more than willing to make exceptions and alternative arrangements for these extra-ordinary times.

 

[kong1802]

And yet it wasn't illegal to worship. The church my mother attends (and helped run for several years) set up streaming sessions with dial-in options for those members without internet access/abilities and then set up outdoor services when the weather was nice. When it got cold again, they switched back to video services. At no point did any of the restrictions that prevented them from having indoor services ever prevent them from holding services at all. The adapted for the greater good and didn't pretend they were victims. Nobody ever claimed that dealing with a pandemic would be easy, but for some reason there are plenty of people who think only others should be impacted by it.

You said you don't care if having no restrictions meant that 10 million people died. Well guess what? The impact on the economy that the lockdowns and restrictions have had would pale in comparison to the disaster that would have unfolded in your scenario.

Now now, you know the economy would have continued strong as ever if we didn't mess it all up by trying to save people............

 

[DisneyDebRob]

I get it, you're not religious.

Either way, "illegal to gather in large groups" is just as bad, even if church had nothing to do with it. Free association and freedom of exercise are BOTH bedrock enumerated rights.

People were worshiping in their own homes for thousands of years. If you believe I’m sure god could care less if your in a church with others or at home.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

And not everyone who is religious disagrees with the restrictions. I'm sure God cares more about people's wellbeing than He does about their ability to worship in groups.

Imagine arriving at the pearly gates and being told, "Sorry, you're not on the list. Sure, you prayed at home to keep hospitals from being overrun and to keep your friends, family, and the country in general safer, but you should have loved the Big Guy enough to risk all that, you big faker."

 

[Tom P.]

And yet it wasn't illegal to worship. The church my mother attends (and helped run for several years) set up streaming sessions with dial-in options for those members without internet access/abilities and then set up outdoor services when the weather was nice. When it got cold again, they switched back to video services. At no point did any of the restrictions that prevented them from having indoor services ever prevent them from holding services at all. The adapted for the greater good and didn't pretend they were victims. Nobody ever claimed that dealing with a pandemic would be easy, but for some reason there are plenty of people who think only others should be impacted by it.

You said you don't care if having no restrictions meant that 10 million people died. Well guess what? The impact on the economy that the lockdowns and restrictions have had would pale in comparison to the disaster that would have unfolded in your scenario.

The first amendment says nothing about freedom to worship. That is modern phrasing. The first amendment talks about freedom of religion. Religion is far more than just worship.

I understand, of course, that not everyone has the same religious beliefs. I am Catholic. There are aspects of our faith that simply cannot be conducted remotely. In particular, you cannot receive the sacraments over YouTube. You cannot go to confession over a Zoom call. And while there are many churches that stream Mass -- my wife and I even handle the streaming for our church! -- you cannot receive the Eucharist remotely, nor do you receive the same sacramental graces as attending in person. And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

 

[LittleBuford]

Imagine arriving at the pearly gates and being told, "Sorry, you're not on the list. Sure, you prayed at home to keep hospitals from being overrun and to keep your friends, family, and the country in general safer, but you should have loved the Big Guy enough to risk all that, you big faker."

I understand that many people find congregational worship spiritually nourishing, but all of us have been deprived of spaces and activities that keep us mentally and emotionally happy. It's a necessary sacrifice that religious people are far from alone in making.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

You know it was literally *illegal to go to church* in many parts of the country for the better part of a year, right?

I do not know that. Smaller churches around me never closed. The church I attend switched to online gatherings from week 1, they have since had large outdoor gatherings as well as in-person gatherings with masks and socially distanced.

Churches around me have always had the right to gather and worship, just not in large numbers indoors. My church has not seemed to have any issue with that.

What has your church been doing?

 

[FeelsSoGoodToBeBad]

If you are so much of a Karen that you complained about people sitting at their own table without a mask then you are a total loser. Please do not go to Disney if you are anywhere near that afraid of the virus.

Seems a bit harsh, but I guess I got a different impression than you did by the restated/clarified rule.

I took it more to address people that were using the dining areas, without having ordered a meal or drink, and more like the "relaxation stations" were intended to be used. In that case, because there is such a limited amount of seating, it makes sense for Disney to clarify the rule so that CMs have a leg to stand on when they ask non-dining/drinking individuals to please move along so that those who need a place to eat their meal can do so.

That said, opening more dining options would help alleviate the issue as well, which seems like something there is a demand for, given some of the reported wait times to get a meal after ordering, even during off-times.

 

[LittleBuford]

And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

Historically, most Catholics received the Eucharist only once a year at Easter. In the whole scheme of things, today's Catholics will receive Holy Communion many, many more times than their forefathers, even with the interruption to services that COVID brings.

 

[Heppenheimer]

The first amendment says nothing about freedom to worship. That is modern phrasing. The first amendment talks about freedom of religion. Religion is far more than just worship.

I understand, of course, that not everyone has the same religious beliefs. I am Catholic. There are aspects of our faith that simply cannot be conducted remotely. In particular, you cannot receive the sacraments over YouTube. You cannot go to confession over a Zoom call. And while there are many churches that stream Mass -- my wife and I even handle the streaming for our church! -- you cannot receive the Eucharist remotely, nor do you receive the same sacramental graces as attending in person. And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

I can't speak of every diocese, but our bishop passed a dispensation for the Eucharist requirement.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

The first amendment says nothing about freedom to worship. That is modern phrasing. The first amendment talks about freedom of religion. Religion is far more than just worship.

I understand, of course, that not everyone has the same religious beliefs. I am Catholic. There are aspects of our faith that simply cannot be conducted remotely. In particular, you cannot receive the sacraments over YouTube. You cannot go to confession over a Zoom call. And while there are many churches that stream Mass -- my wife and I even handle the streaming for our church! -- you cannot receive the Eucharist remotely, nor do you receive the same sacramental graces as attending in person. And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

Churches around me have been doing drive-thru communion. My church has been doing communion online (not catholic obviously).

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I am religious, and I found other ways to practice my faith this year that didn't involve endangering my or my fellow parishioners' health. And our church was more than willing to make exceptions and alternative arrangements for these extra-ordinary times.

That's fine. Your religion allows that flexibility. Some don't.

And again, "religion" is really beside the point. "...the right of the people peaceably to assemble..." is unambiguous.

 

[kong1802]

The first amendment says nothing about freedom to worship. That is modern phrasing. The first amendment talks about freedom of religion. Religion is far more than just worship.

I understand, of course, that not everyone has the same religious beliefs. I am Catholic. There are aspects of our faith that simply cannot be conducted remotely. In particular, you cannot receive the sacraments over YouTube. You cannot go to confession over a Zoom call. And while there are many churches that stream Mass -- my wife and I even handle the streaming for our church! -- you cannot receive the Eucharist remotely, nor do you receive the same sacramental graces as attending in person. And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

Didn't your Archdiocese suspend some of the religious "requirements" for the time being?

Also, a lot are back to offering communion and such, to meet the periodical requirement. So your argument kind of falls apart here.

 

[Touchdown]

That's fine. Your religion allows that flexibility. Some don't.

Show me one religion that hasn’t.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

The first amendment says nothing about freedom to worship. That is modern phrasing. The first amendment talks about freedom of religion. Religion is far more than just worship.

I understand, of course, that not everyone has the same religious beliefs. I am Catholic. There are aspects of our faith that simply cannot be conducted remotely. In particular, you cannot receive the sacraments over YouTube. You cannot go to confession over a Zoom call. And while there are many churches that stream Mass -- my wife and I even handle the streaming for our church! -- you cannot receive the Eucharist remotely, nor do you receive the same sacramental graces as attending in person. And, yes, receiving the Eucharist is required of Catholics periodically.

The Pope seemed to be okay with it, so I wouldn't expect anyone to face any sort of punishment for missing any of the things normally required due to following safety protocols. I don't mean that in a dismissive or condescending way, if that's how it comes across. I just mean that even the Pope acknowledged that exceptions can be made during times like this.

Pope urges virus lockdown obedience amid church-state debate

ROME (AP) — Pope Francis waded into the church-state debate about virus-imposed lockdowns of religious services, calling Tuesday for "prudence and obedience" to government protocols to prevent infections from surging

www.theoaklandpress.com

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Show me one religion that hasn’t.

Irrelevant. The right of the people "peaceably to assemble" is not dependent on religion.

 

[Horizons '83]

I think we need to add a Religious Discussion Tag on this thread now too.