I realize these restrictions were already eased but... I don't see how any locale can restrict religious service if it has indoor dining or bars open. If anything, the former can be done with masks. That said, it should be noted that singing/choir indoors is especially high-risk.https://twitter.com/stevenmazie/status/1331838731893043201 …
-
Show this thread
-
Yes, restricting certain liberties and mandating certain precautions can be necessary for public health during a pandemic. But it is a high price and has to be narrowly-tailored and scientifically solid. Otherwise, we lose legitimacy, plus it doesn't work. And that's what we did.
4 replies 14 retweets 222 likesShow this thread -
I'm not making a legal comment! Regardless of legal basis: restrictions must target activity by risk type. Any place that has indoor dining, bars and gyms open but tries to limit other, often lower-risk activities, is losing legitimacy and not targeting the pandemic properly.
10 replies 34 retweets 271 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Carly
Indoor dining: unmasked. Again, not making a legal comment. Our hierarchy of closures should have started with indoor dining/bars/gyms—instead, most places kept/keep those open. Worship can be high risk (singing/unmasked) or lower risk (outdoors, masked).https://twitter.com/stagzr/status/1332004718848081920 …
zeynep tufekci added,
6 replies 6 retweets 85 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
I think you’ve got this wrong, Zeynep. New York’s regulations do not forbid “worship” or single out churches. They forbid indoor gatherings above a certain size (10 or 25 people, depending on conditions in the area). It’s SCOTUS that’s making an exception for religion.
1 reply 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @JamesGleick
So, can't comment on the legal part (though the first amendment does specifically protect worship.) What I'm saying is that keeping indoor dining/bars/open this long in many places plus leadership hypocrisy has caused a legitimacy crisis.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Are you implying that this “legitimacy crisis” justifies, or influenced, the SCOTUS decision? The decision is an abomination and should not be defended. Personally I disagree with many state and local judgments about schools, restaurants, bars, etc., but these are tough calls.
3 replies 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @JamesGleick
The Supreme Court decision is occurring in a context where the restrictions don’t look fair or science-based. Even the number versus percent capacity limits don’t make sense to me.
4 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
Today’s SCOTUS decision is in the latter category. It is ideological, unjustified by logic or precedent, and disdainful of science.
12 replies 19 retweets 125 likes
Unfortunately we’ve had a lot of decisions/restrictions that were disdainful science.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.