Destruction in the education world has been noticable to me over the last several weeks. Most of the articles have discussed the devastation in primary and secondary education. There will also be major disruption in higher education.
Today’s articles:
Devastation on kids caused by the lockdown is becoming more visible with every day that passes. A few articles pointing this out:
As we finish our first year of shutting down education for our kids and shutting down the economy for everyone evidence is emerging of what a terrible mistake we made.
A series of posts will commemorate this regrettable anniversary.
Today’s articles:
The craziness from government officials is getting worse instead of better.
The Peel school district, headquartered in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada posted an official “recommendation” of a 14 day solitary quarantine for any child in the district sent home because someone else in the student’s classroom tested positive.
Yes, you read that right. If any child in a classroom is sent home because of a positive test, that means that every student in the classroom will be sent home.
Not only that, but the school district also “recommends” every child in the classroom be quarantined, by themselves, in a separate room, for 14 days.
No contact with mommy. No contact with daddy. No contact with siblings. No contact with anyone else.
In case you think I’m making this up, check out this coverage:
(more…)
Only have one post since the start of the year on the damage caused by the government imposed shutdown of education, the economy, travel, and health systems. That’s not because the damage is easing up. It’s just because I’ve not taken the time to write about the articles I see every day.
The damage continues. Merely a few of the articles of recent interest:
Apparently neither officials in Santa Clara County nor a panel of the Ninth circuit Court of Appeals were able to read the injunction issued by the Supreme Court or that the state allowed indoor worship.
After the injunction allowing indoor worship was issued and after the state of California allowed indoor worship up to 25% of capacity, it should have been obvious to officials in the county and all the judges on the Court of Appeals that indoor worship was allowed.
Seems like said officials and judges were not able to comprehend the order.
(more…)
Effective 2/6/21, the state of California will allow indoor worship services, with attendance limited to 25% of capacity. The revised public health order can be found here.
The health order says the linked guidance found here for places of worship is being updated. The document, COVID-19 Industry Guidance: Places of Worship and Providers of Religious Services and Cultural Ceremonies, requires social distancing and specific cleaning protocols.
It also bans singing and chanting.
The destruction caused by the shutdown is frightening. The cost continues to mount with every week the economy is shattered by government edict.
Here is a small sampler of articles visible over recent weeks:
In two rulings late on Friday, 2/5/21, the Supreme Court issued emergency injunctions in favor of two California churches allowing them to resume in-person worship services on 2/7/21.
The longer ruling with multiple concurring or dissenting opinions was issued on behalf of South Bay United Pentecostal Church, located in San Diego. The follow-on injunction, issued after the first, is shorter. It was issued on behalf of Harvest Rock Church, with its main campus in Pasadena, California and a large number of other campus locations around the state.
The day after the rulings were issued, Gov. Newsom’s office said the state will revise its public health orders regarding indoor worship services. For a brief reference on the issue see In Valley Daily bulletin on 2/6/21 – Newsom says state will revise indoor worship guides after Supreme Court ruling.
Well, that didn’t take long.
On Thursday, 1/21/21 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied an appeal from South Bay United Pentecostal Church, in Chula Vista, California, requesting an injunction to allow them to worship indoors.
On Monday, 1/25/21, the church filed an emergency appeal with the United States Supreme Court requesting an immediate injunction.
This case was discussed yesterday: With eyes tightly closed, District courts and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rule than ban on indoor worship is a perfectly acceptable infringement on Free Exercise clause.
To end the irreparable harm caused by unwarranted infringement on free exercise clause of the First Amendment, the church requested an injunction in order to allow worship by 1/31/21. The state of California has until 1/29/21 to file their response.
The church’s attorney explained why the church is back at the Supreme Court and why church leadership is so confident SCOTUS will issue an injunction:
Two federal district judges and two different panels of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals closed their eyes ever so tightly to prevent them from reading either the First Amendment or the very strong, very clear Supreme Court injunctions as they ruled that California’s rule prohibiting all indoor worship while in tier 4 is perfectly fine.
Pasadena News reports on 1/25/21 Harvest Rock Church Wins One, Loses One.
Catholic News Agency reports on 1/25/21 Appeals court rules on California churches that challenged Covid restrictions.
10 News reports on 1/23/21 – Appeals Court denies Chula Vista churches request reopen (sic)
Harvest Rock
Harvest Rock’s lawsuit against the ban on indoor worship service was reheard by the District Court after the Supreme Court issued a powerful injunction shredding every rationalization for banning worship services.
In spite of the exquisitely clear explanation in the injunction, on 12/22/20 the District Court found the restrictions on indoor worship to be perfectly reasonable and not at all an infringement on the First Amendment.
Harvest Rock appealed the decision. Sometime late last week (exact date is not clear to me) a panel of the 9th Circuit ruled against the church, finding the ban on indoor worship was acceptable.
While the panel’s inability to read Supreme Court injunctions is as surprising as it is unfortunate, the good news is this clears the way for the Supreme Court to address the issue directly. Again.
The church is moving forward with an appeal to the Supreme Court.
An increasing number of actual scientific analyses are emerging on coronavirus infection. There is so much information out that it is quite confusing. The trend my little brain is seeing is raising substantive questions about the official narrative we’ve been told.
Articles for you to consider today:
Do your own research. – Don’t want to believe actual science published by someone else? Resources are available to do your own research.
For starters, check out the CDC website CDC COVID Data Tracker. That page has data for each state including total cases and cases in last seven days. It also has tallies per 100,000 people, including cases/100k, deaths/100k, seven-day-cases/100k.
Pull some data, do a bunch of calculations, and think for yourself.
I’ve pulled data from that CDC site and have done some graphing. I’m struggling to see any beneficial correlation between infection rates in relation to mask mandates & shutdowns.
For example, Texas and Florida with light restrictions and requirements have about the same cumulative infections per 100K and deaths per 100K as do California and New York with strong restrictions and requirements. Currently, New York and California are experiencing far higher infection rates than Texas or Florida.
12/22/20 – Alachua Chronicle – University of Florida researchers find no asymptomatic or presymptomatic spread – Four researchers did a meta-study of 54 studies. They looked at secondary spread within households.
The government ordered shutdown of the economy in 2020 has devastated primary education, secondary education, higher education, travel industry, entertainment industry, small businesses, restaurants, physical health, mental health, and detective/ preventive treatment of chronic and deadly disease. Level of unemployment is second only to the Great Depression. We have seen evaporation of wealth, savings, trust in government officials at all levels, and trust in every public health official in the country.
I have over 100 posts protesting the foolishness and destruction this year with those posts containing close to 90,000 words describing the devastation.
This will be the last routine post describing the intentional disruption we have suffered this year. I will have one more post describing actual science that is surfacing, which is in sharp contrast to the alleged “science” that has driven the demolition of the country.
Discussion in this post:
Indicators of the devastation in the travel industry
11/4/20 – Wall Street Journal – How Coronavirus Ravaged Travel in 2020 – The Middle Seat column tabulated a number of indicators showing the illness across entire travel industry.
What does the collapse of an entire industry look like? A few stats:
Traffic at three largest New York airports:
There are so many elected officials, political leaders, and public health officials ignoring the rules they demand you and I follow that two different websites are accumulating a list of the incidents.
Covid Hypocrisy: Policymakers Breaking Their Own Rules
Visualization from Heritage.org tracks incidents in the United States. A map shows location and provides one sentence summary.
Detail of incidence are listed, which includes date, name of the public official betraying the public trust, location, and description of incident. The description includes a link to news article explaining the hypocrisy.
On 12/24/20 I count 42 incidents. As you would expect, California is in the lead with eight incidents if you include the legislator’s junket to Hawaii for a vacation funded by lobbyists.
Don’t know what you have read of the Supreme Court decision that has restored the free expression clause to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
This ruling is significant because SCOTUS has issued three additional temporary injunctions citing this specific ruling when ordering the District Court to reconsider their incorrect decision.
Several sentences in the ruling have been widely quoted.
After reading the full decision, I realize it is stronger than I realized. Harsh even.
I have brought plenty of sarcasm and ridicule to bear discussing the attacks on the First Amendment willfully carried out by many politicians and public health officials. My point-and-laugh-out-loud efforts pale in comparison to comments from the ruling and several concurring arguments.
The Supreme Court injunction is titled ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF BROOKLYN, NEW YORK v. ANDREW M. CUOMO, GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK.
Link to the text can be found at No. 20A87 with the actual text found here.
I will quote a large number of the specific comments in the ruling with a few of my observations
Comments from unsigned opinion:
Some background:
The two applications, one filed by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and the other by Agudath Israel of America and affiliated entities, contend that these restrictions violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and they ask us to enjoin enforcement of the restrictions while they pursue appellate review. Citing a variety of remarks made by the Governor, Agudath Israel argues that the Governor specifically targeted the Orthodox Jewish community and gerrymandered the boundaries of red and orange zones to ensure that heavily Orthodox areas were included. Both the Diocese and Agudath Israel maintain that the regulations treat houses of worship much more harshly than comparable secular facilities.
…
In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.
…
Because the challenged restrictions are not “neutral” and of “general applicability,” they must satisfy “strict scrutiny,” and this means that they must be “narrowly tailored” to serve a “compelling” state interest.
…
Not only is there no evidence that the applicants have contributed to the spread of COVID-19 but there are many other less restrictive rules that could be adopted to minimize the risk to those attending religious services. Among other things, the maximum attendance at a religious service could be tied to the size of the church or synagogue. Almost all of the 26 Diocese churches immediately affected by the Executive Order can seat at least 500 people, about 14 can accommodate at least 700, and 2 can seat over 1,000. Similarly, Agudath Israel of Kew Garden Hills can seat up to 400. It is hard to believe that admitting more than 10 people to a 1,000-seat church or 400-seat synagogue would create a more serious health risk than the many other activities that the State allows. (emphasis added)
….
Members of this Court are not public health experts, and we should respect the judgment of those with special expertise and responsibility in this area. But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here, by effectively barring many from attending religious services, strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty. Before allowing this to occur, we have a duty to conduct a serious examination of the need for such a drastic measure. (emphasis added)
Look at that again: