It was sadly no surprise that lockdowns were at times selectively enforced. Freedom of assembly and of religion are both constitutionally protected in the U.S. and are also supposed to enjoy such guarantees in many other countries. Lockdowns clearly violated free assembly. Some have argued that lockdowns did not truly violate freedom of worship, as religious bodies are more than just a building. Yet that argument ultimately doesn’t hold up. After all, limits on many other types of assembly were clearly unconstitutional, so why wouldn’t it be the same for religion? At the same time, would allowing houses of worship to remain open while everything else is banned give unfair privileges to religion? If limits on in-person religious services are unconstitutional, then limits on other activities should be ruled unconstitutional too. It’s only fair.
Lockdowns for thee, not for me
Lockdowns for thee, not for me
Lockdowns for thee, not for me
It was sadly no surprise that lockdowns were at times selectively enforced. Freedom of assembly and of religion are both constitutionally protected in the U.S. and are also supposed to enjoy such guarantees in many other countries. Lockdowns clearly violated free assembly. Some have argued that lockdowns did not truly violate freedom of worship, as religious bodies are more than just a building. Yet that argument ultimately doesn’t hold up. After all, limits on many other types of assembly were clearly unconstitutional, so why wouldn’t it be the same for religion? At the same time, would allowing houses of worship to remain open while everything else is banned give unfair privileges to religion? If limits on in-person religious services are unconstitutional, then limits on other activities should be ruled unconstitutional too. It’s only fair.