New executive order #68 designed to shut down bars in HR, Oh, and RELIGION too.
Gov. Northam's latest order openly targets Hampton Roads bars by drawing spurious conclusions from questionable data.
Northam said his measure “effectively closes the bars,” adding that “we all know alcohol changes your judgment.” --according to wtop.com
In addition to singling out bars, order 68, like order 67, singles out religious services as a more restricted category of "in-person gatherings" rather than the more apt classification that includes social clubs and performing arts venues. The latter classification, labeled "Entertainment and Amusement Businesses," the number of attendees remains the lesser of 50% of the occupancy permitted or 1000 persons.
The "All Public And Private In-Person Gatherings" section adds new language to not require families to physically distance while in their own home.
The religion restrictions begins with "Nothing in this Order is intended to place further restrictions on religious services. As permitted in Executive Order 67 and Order of Public Health Emergency Seven," and continues with a reiteration of Order 67 requirements up to "If religious services cannot be conducted in compliance with the above requirements, they must not be held in-person."
However it follows up with this contradictory text:
"Further, any social gathering held in connection with a religious service is subject to the public and private in-person gatherings restriction of 50 individuals or less. "
The enforcement section is similar to order 67 but broken down into 3 paragraphs. While the language is stronger toward the victim "business listed in paragraph 1," Churches are not listed in paragraph 1 so are only subject to the State Health Commissioner, who may "seek injunctive relief..." (M.Norman Oliver, MD, MA, State Health Commissioner)The consequences of the executive branch of Virginia attempting to write law without the normal process that laws and regulations go through, is unclear, contradictory, and messy language that does little to address the problem at hand. In this case it's questionable whether the pandemic is even being addressed when Northam clearly attacks drinking in bars and church attendance without solid evidence to justify either. There is absolutely no cause to rationalize the squelching of our First Amendment right to freely worship. Was this slipped into order#68 specifically to threaten the megachurches common in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia?
 |
| Searched: biggest mega churches in Virginia |
The confusion is amplified by ambitious politicians in local governments, eager to implement perceived new powers of control.
as of yet unanswered email to Governor's office:
ReplyDeleteSecretary Yarmosky,
I'm looking for clarification on what seems to be contradictory language in executive order # 68 regarding in-person religious services. The third paragraph of Directive item 2 begins "Nothing in this Order is intended to place further restrictions on religious services. As
permitted in Executive Order 67..." but item 2 ends with "Further, any social gathering held in connection with a religious service is subject to the public and private in-person gatherings restriction of 50 individuals or less."
As far as I understand it, order 67 limited all people that gather for any particular religious service to a total of 250 and now order 68 limits them to only 50. However I could be misunderstanding order 67, which leads me to my next question.
In order # 67, was the limit of in-person gatherings as it applies to religious services intended to be applied equally as similar venues such as for performing arts, concerts, and movies. In those cases as directed in order 67 item 11 subparagraph b, only the private bookings would be limited by the in-person gathering number. If the churches are equal to similar venues in order 67, this would make sense that order 68 places no further restrictions and religious services in a venue that is able to handle 2000 or more have only been limited to the 1000 (or 50% of the lowest occupancy load of the venue.) It is private bookings such as weddings and wakes that are limited to 250 in order 67 and 50 in order 68?
Thank you for your time in sorting this out. I understand that it is difficult to get regulations written clearly in such rushed times as these, especially from the executive office which was not designed to do such things.
Sincerely,
Robert Bruce Alexander, Blogger, Organizer,
YorkTeaParty.org, PeninsulaTeaParty.org