WELL posted:It's the best thing that could happen. Catholics first then the Baptist next. God would be so pleased.
It sounds like some judging going on. One of the criticisms I overhear directed at Christians or some Churches is that they are so judgmental toward others. Is not this statement doing exactly the same thing, that is judging Catholics and Baptist? Personally, it's not a question about religion or this Church or that Chruch but Religious freedom. DeBlasio may have some basis in issuing fines based upon limitations of numbers that can congregate together at any one time but to threaten permanent closure should not only offend those who are Christian or Religious but those who treasure freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution.
DeBlasio is just another politician who knows far less than he pretends he knows. He also accepts no culpability in the spread in New York due to his own actions and words at the beginning of this pandemic. He was one that ignored what was going on in other parts of the World and in a boastful way encouraged people to congregate and go out to various places in New York City, that they could handle anything that comes up until it became so obvious that New York was the epicenter of the US epidemics and things were out of control and threatening to overwhelm New York's resources.
If there is a penalty for violating an order not to exceed a certain number, gathered together, that is one thing but to threaten the death penalty or permanent closure to one specific group is demonstrating a personal bias against Religion or Christianity, which I'm sure he has. Until there is a reliable treatment and/or vaccine then I'm all for restricting large gatherings where people are or will be, in close proximity to each other. I don't see such restrictions as a violation against a certain entity but rather the protection of the general public.