stemelbow Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 14 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Depends on if you believe God says about it. What does he say? It doesn't seem to me God, in actuality, has said anything about anything. He sends impressions to people and they say it, and they could be wrong. 14 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: On the one hand you have the rain falling on the just and the unjust and God being no respecter of persons, but on the other hand you have promises of the windows of heaven opened to tithe payers and specific blessings through making covenants, obeying to God's commandments (the Lehite promise for this land), keeping the Word of Wisdom, etc. But that's all imagined, it seems. Everyone randomly seems to get these gifts. A believer gets it just as much as an ardent unbeliever.
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 16 hours ago, CV75 said: The increasing trend for tolerance for (acquiescence for, reliance upon, dependency on) executive orders, depending on how you measure them per a previous post of mine, is observed for all kinds of situations. A public health emergency might be a valid reason for an executive order, but that does reverse a problematic trend nor the trend for less tolerance (support, appreciation, respect, etc.) for religion. Increasing tolerance for executive orders is a concern (if that is really happening - I'm not sure it is). The use of executive orders was very low until Teddy Roosevelt, then they skyrocketed, then peaked with Franklin Roosevelt, after which there was a rapid and steady decrease in executive orders after that. The biggest jump we have seen in use of executive orders is with the current President who averages more executive orders per year than any other President since Jimmy Carter My concern is that people's worries regarding the overuse of executive orders during normal non-pandemic times (which remains historically very low) is skewing their judgment of the execution of 10th amendment (which is a very different use of executive order) powers during a pandemic. Their skepticism and distrust in executive orders is thwarting effective public health response. 16 hours ago, CV75 said: Who suggested that there is a trend in decreasing tolerance toward religion through executive order? That came out of nowhere! Well, isn't that what the OP is about - how executive orders are a threat to religious liberty (specifically in terms of the pandemic)? If they are not related, why are we talking about two separate unrelated issues? 16 hours ago, CV75 said: Are you observing general trends for support of religious liberty and less support for executive orders? Yes, I am seeing general trends and legal battles which favor religious liberty. https://www.ibj.com/articles/curt-smith-religious-liberty-cases-are-trending-the-right-way Historically, there has been a steady decrease in the use of executive orders by Presidents. When it comes to Presidents using executive orders, more disapprove than approve. 42% approve. 43% disapprove. 15% not sure. While 63% agree that Presidents should be able to use executive orders at least sometimes. I am not sure which trend you are talking about. I am not sure about the historical trends of executive order use by different states. That would be interesting to see. https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2014/12/02/opinion-split-executive-orders No, I think our religious liberties are safe - look at the Supreme Court right now. I think this is a boogeyman - especially as it relates to the pandemic. 1
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: That's not clear to me. Do you mean people choosing to go to Church threaten even more people? Yes. 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Well, that would also depend on what state constitutions have to say about such things. Ours says, As far as I am aware, the 10th amendment of the constitution of the USA trumps any state constitution. 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: I suppose Governor Inslee is relying on the bolded part. But there are many other things that he allows to go on during COVIC that are inconsistent with the safety of the state. Religion just happens to be an easy target. There is no question that religious freedom is under attack in our state....not always by the state, but also by the predominant culture in the power areas. Yes, I agree that if there are any powers who are attacking religious liberty, they will be found in your State. Keep up the good fight, but please let public health officials do their job in influencing executive orders in response to the pandemic. We can't afford to have all the misguided distrust in public health officials right now. We are just shooting ourselves in the foot. We don't need to question executive orders which are backed by the top public health officials in all the land. This is not about an attack on religious liberty for them, this is purely about public health. They know what they are talking about. 16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: Frankly, Brother Pogi, I do not know who or what to believe, and I have tried to follow this closely. On the one hand our governor says our hospitals are overflowing with new COVID patients so we have to clamp everything down again, but my SIL who is an obstetrics nurse at a major local hospital says that is a lie. The hospitals are being stressed because of end-of-the-year budget cut backs in staffing, and more elective procedures that are happening after the COVID scares, and that her hospital and those around us are not overwhelmed with COVID patients. We are propagandized to the hilt every day in the media, but every study and promise is followed with contradictory studies and promises. While positive test results have increased, death rates have not. So, I do not trust the claim that going to church with the restrictions we had been under for three weeks is now more dangerous than it was four weeks ago. I feel far safer in church than shopping at Walmart or Target. I think the political parties (both sides, but our very Progressive state especially), the medical establishment, and the press have all given us a great disservice. Who is telling the truth? I think Johnny Carson had a great show about that once. With all due respect to your SIL, she doesn't work in the ICU. The ICU numbers are reported by the hospitals as required by the health department. They are not lying about ICU usage. Why would they. It is elevated across the board. Are all hospitals in on some conspiracy or something? The stress is directly related to ICU numbers, end-of-the-year budget cuts is completely unrelated (however, cut backs in staffing certainly is a concern when ICUs are maxing out beds. Of course, death rates are not going to increase with positive test results. Why would they? The number of daily deaths however, are absolutely increasing with increased positive test results. The death rate stays relatively consistent, but it has decreased some since the beginning of the outbreak with improvements in care and probably due to increased mask use which can lower the virus load and decrease severity of disease. When the death rate stays fairly consistent, deaths will naturally follow the trend in the number of positive cases up or down. It is unavoidable and the numbers show that in every state when we see major trends. That is why we all have to do our part to keep positive cases low, because a fairly consistent and concerning percentage of them will inevitably end up in an ICU or die. Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi 2
Bernard Gui Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 10 minutes ago, pogi said: Yes. As far as I am aware, the 10th amendment of the constitution of the USA trumps any state constitution. Yes, I agree that if there are any powers who are attacking religious liberty, they will be found in your State. Keep up the good fight, but please let public health officials do their job in influencing executive orders in response to the pandemic. We can't afford to have all the misguided distrust in public health officials right now. We are just shooting ourselves in the foot. We don't need to question executive orders which are backed by the top public health officials in all the land. This is not about an attack on religious liberty for them, this is purely about public health. They know what they are talking about. With all do respect to your SIL, she doesn't work in the ICU. The ICU numbers are reported by the hospitals as required by the health department. They are not lying about ICU usage. Why would they. It is elevated across the board. Are all hospitals in on some conspiracy or something? The stress is directly related to ICU numbers, end-of-the-year budget cuts is completely unrelated (however, cut backs in staffing certainly is a concern when ICUs are maxing out beds. Of course, death rates are not going to increase with positive test results. Why would they? The number of daily deaths however, are absolutely increasing with increased positive test results. The death rate stays relatively consistent, but it has decreased some since the beginning of the outbreak with improvements in care and probably due to increased mask use which can lower the virus load and decrease severity of disease. When the death rate stays fairly consistent, deaths will naturally follow the trend in the number of positive cases up or down. It is unavoidable and the numbers show that in every state when we see major trends. That is why we all have to do our part to keep positive cases low, because a fairly consistent and concerning percentage of them will inevitably end up in an ICU or die. Yes, she has contact with the ICU through employee friends and hospital communications. She has many contacts and has been there a long time. They also have access to regional hospital networks..
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 12 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Yes, she has contact with the ICU through employee friends and hospital communications. She has many contacts and has been there a long time. They also have access to regional hospital networks.. I haven't been following Washington State's ICU usage rates. Maybe it is not as high in Washington as it is in Utah. I am sure it is easy enough to find the numbers. Our state has a dashboard where the ICU and general hospital usage is reported by the hospitals to the health department and which percentage of those patients are in for Covid related issues. I would trust those numbers over second hand hearsay from an obstetrics doc. There simply is no reason to question their validity. I would also suggest that you have to look at the big picture. 1 isolated hospital ICU will not give you an idea of the overall stress on the healthcare system state wide. In Utah some ICU's are at 100% capacity and are sending patients to other hospitals that are not as hard hit. The governor has to take in the whole picture as reported by the health department when making decisions. He can't consider 1 hospital only. 1
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 1 hour ago, pogi said: Increasing tolerance for executive orders is a concern (if that is really happening - I'm not sure it is). The use of executive orders was very low until Teddy Roosevelt, then they skyrocketed, then peaked with Franklin Roosevelt, after which there was a rapid and steady decrease in executive orders after that. The biggest jump we have seen in use of executive orders is with the current President who averages more executive orders per year than any other President since Jimmy Carter My concern is that people's worries regarding the overuse of executive orders during normal non-pandemic times (which remains historically very low) is skewing their judgment of the execution of 10th amendment (which is a very different use of executive order) powers during a pandemic. Their skepticism and distrust in executive orders is thwarting effective public health response. Well, isn't that what the OP is about - how executive orders are a threat to religious liberty (specifically in terms of the pandemic)? If they are not related, why are we talking about two separate unrelated issues? Yes, I am seeing general trends and legal battles which favor religious liberty. https://www.ibj.com/articles/curt-smith-religious-liberty-cases-are-trending-the-right-way Historically, there has been a steady decrease in the use of executive orders by Presidents. When it comes to Presidents using executive orders, more disapprove than approve. 42% approve. 43% disapprove. 15% not sure. While 63% agree that Presidents should be able to use executive orders at least sometimes. I am not sure which trend you are talking about. I am not sure about the historical trends of executive order use by different states. That would be interesting to see. https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2014/12/02/opinion-split-executive-orders No, I think our religious liberties are safe - look at the Supreme Court right now. I think this is a boogeyman - especially as it relates to the pandemic. Like every other data contest, various news, polling and academic sources show both directions; conclusions about the trend depend on the type, temporal scope and statistical measures under study. For example, the increasing trend in executive orders over the past four years is a valid as the decreasing trend that can be demonstrated by the last 100 years. I’m also pretty sure from personal experience that the COPVID-19 response has resulted in state governors issuing more executive orders than ever – pick a timeframe. But the point is, any emergency (this one just happens to be the pandemic) would highlight these problems synergized by the confluence of attitudes (personal and systemic) toward executive orders and religious expression and practice. Your “boogeyman” remark is polemic made by those who do not agree there is a valid concern. RE: the point of the OP, the concurrent trends are not caused by each other, but together can result in an increase in orders and court cases unfriendly toward religion. Continued diligence in protecting religious freedom is what is needed, hence the emphasis on that point, and I am happy you are satisfied with the legal outcomes so far. I’m seeing kind of an analogy where members criticize the Church for requiring poor people to pay tithes while not paying or only part-paying themselves, perhaps in protest, perhaps in lapsed commitment, or perhaps in some kind of personal crisis, yet attend and enjoy the amenities of Church participation which are covered in part by the "importuned widow’s mite" (yes, I'm mixing parables ). Someone has to foot the bill so to speak, and someone has to promote religious freedom, and I wouldn’t rely solely on the perceived leaning/structure of the Supreme Court to do that since it could change fairly quickly for any number of reasons. Hence the need to beef up our ability work with/through the other two branches to reduce reliance upon and complacency with executive orders and increase appreciation forreligious expression. You may appreciate what I posted here: Posted Saturday at 09:45 AM
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, CV75 said: Like every other data contest, various news, polling and academic sources show both directions; conclusions about the trend depend on the type, temporal scope and statistical measures under study. For example, the increasing trend in executive orders over the past four years is a valid as the decreasing trend that can be demonstrated by the last 100 years. I’m also pretty sure from personal experience that the COPVID-19 response has resulted in state governors issuing more executive orders than ever – pick a timeframe. But the point is, any emergency (this one just happens to be the pandemic) would highlight these problems synergized by the confluence of attitudes (personal and systemic) toward executive orders and religious expression and practice. Your “boogeyman” remark is polemic made by those who do not agree there is a valid concern. RE: the point oAMf the OP, the concurrent trends are not caused by each other, but together can result in an increase in orders and court cases unfriendly toward religion. Continued diligence in protecting religious freedom is what is needed, hence the emphasis on that point, and I am happy you are satisfied with the legal outcomes so far. I’m seeing kind of an analogy where members criticize the Church for requiring poor people to pay tithes while not paying or only part-paying themselves, perhaps in protest, perhaps in lapsed commitment, or perhaps in some kind of personal crisis, yet attend and enjoy the amenities of Church participation which are covered in part by the "importuned widow’s mite" (yes, I'm mixing parables ). Someone has to foot the bill so to speak, and someone has to promote religious freedom, and I wouldn’t rely solely on the perceived leaning/structure of the Supreme Court to do that since it could change fairly quickly for any number of reasons. Hence the need to beef up our ability work with/through the other two branches to reduce reliance upon and complacency with executive orders and increase appreciation forreligious expression. You may appreciate what I posted here: Posted Saturday at 09:45 You simply are not connecting the pieces for me to believe there is any concerning trend that disfavors religious liberty and favors executive order. Highlighting the increased executive orders during a pandemic is not a trend and is completely justified and isolated. Where is the trend? One little blip by the current President doesn't represent a trend in attitudes. We are down to an average of 51 executive orders/year from a high of 307. Somehow our religious liberties have remained intact through all of it, including the major pandemic of 1918 when executive orders spiked and closed down churches across the country. Religious liberty is trending with winning battles in court. You haven't convinced me of anything. I am in no way suggesting that we should not defend religious liberties from real threats. I just don't think the pandemic is a real threat to religious liberty. I do think outcries for religious liberty in a time like this are a real threat to public health however. Executive Orders by President, Average Per Years in Office President Term Total Orders Avg/Year Yrs in Office EO Number Range George Washington Total 8 1 7.85 unnumbered John Adams Total 1 0.25 4.00 unnumbered Thomas Jefferson Total 4 0.50 8.00 unnumbered James Madison Total 1 0.13 8.00 unnumbered James Monroe Total 1 0.13 8.00 unnumbered John Quincy Adams Total 3 0.75 4.00 unnumbered Andrew Jackson Total 12 1.5 8.00 unnumbered Martin van Buren Total 10 2.5 4.00 unnumbered William Henry Harrison Total 0 0 0.08 unnumbered John Tyler Total 17 4.3 3.92 unnumbered James K. Polk Total 18 4.5 4.00 unnumbered Zachary Taylor Total 5 3.7 1.35 unnumbered Millard Fillmore Total 12 4.5 2.65 unnumbered Franklin Pierce Total 35 9 4.00 unnumbered James Buchanan Total 16 4 4.00 unnumbered Abraham Lincoln Total 48 12 4.12 unnumbered Andrew Johnson Total 79 20 3.89 unnumbered Ulysses S. Grant Total 217 27 8.00 unnumbered Rutherford B. Hayes Total 92 23 4.00 unnumbered James Garfield Total 6 11 0.55 unnumbered Chester Arthur Total 96 28 3.46 unnumbered Grover Cleveland - I Total 113 28 4.00 unnumbered Benjamin Harrison Total 143 36 4.00 unnumbered Grover Cleveland - II Total 140 35 4.00 unnumbered William McKinley Total 185 41 4.53 unnumbered Theodore Roosevelt Total 1,081 145 7.47 William Howard Taft Total 724 181 4.00 Woodrow Wilson Total 1,803 225 8.00 Warren G. Harding Total 522 217 2.41 Calvin Coolidge Total 1,203 215 5.59 Herbert Hoover Total 968 242 4.00 5075 - 6070 Franklin D. Roosevelt Total 3,721 307 12.12 6071 - 9537 Harry S. Truman Total 907 117 7.78 9538 - 10431 I 504 133 3.78 9538 - 10029 II 403 101 4.00 10030 - 10431 Dwight D. Eisenhower Total 484 61 8.00 10432 - 10913 I 266 67 4.00 10432 - 10695-A II 218 55 4.00 10696 - 10913 John F. Kennedy Total 214 75 2.84 10914 - 11127 Lyndon B. Johnson Total 325 63 5.17 11128 - 11451 Richard Nixon Total 346 62 5.55 11452 - 11797 I 247 62 4.00 11452 - 11698 II 99 64 1.55 11699 - 11797 Gerald R. Ford Total 169 69 2.45 11798 - 11966 Jimmy Carter Total 320 80 4.00 11967 - 12286 Ronald Reagan Total 381 48 8.00 12287 - 12667 I 213 53 4.00 12287 - 12499 II 168 42 4.00 12500 - 12667 George Bush Total 166 42 4.00 12668 - 12833 William J. Clinton Total 364 46 8.00 12834 - 13197 I 200 50 4.00 12834 - 13033 II 164 41 4.00 13034 - 13197 George W. Bush Total 291 36 8.00 13198 - 13488 I 173 43 4.00 13198 - 13370 II 118 30 4.00 13371 - 13488 Barack Obama Total 276 35 8.00 13489 - 13764 I 147 37 4.00 13489 - 13635 II 129 32 4.00 13636 - 13764 Donald J. Trump Total 192 51 3.75 13765 - 13956 Note: EO counts are usually updated monthly following the 20th day of the month to recompute average per year. Orders issued between updates can be accessed here on the Executive Orders page Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi 1
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 2 hours ago, pogi said: You simply are not connecting the pieces for me to believe there is any concerning trend that disfavors religious liberty and favors executive order. Highlighting the increased executive orders during a pandemic is not a trend and is completely justified and isolated. Where is the trend? One little blip by the current President doesn't represent a trend in attitudes. We are down to an average of 51 executive orders/year from a high of 307. Somehow our religious liberties have remained intact through all of it, including the major pandemic of 1918 when executive orders spiked and closed down churches across the country. Religious liberty is trending with winning battles in court. You haven't convinced me of anything. I am in no way suggesting that we should not defend religious liberties from real threats. I just don't think the pandemic is a real threat to religious liberty. I do think outcries for religious liberty in a time like this are a real threat to public health however. Looking at the 5-year trend on this listing (yes I considered that one days ago in my own googling), and excluding all other qualifiers, there is an increase. And yes, attitudes can flip very quickly. Look at the steady drops from 2003-2007: https://www.pewresearch.org/2007/10/15/trends-in-attitudes-toward-religion-and-social-issues-19872007/ As far as trying to convince you that the pandemic itself is a real threat to religious liberty, that is the second a strawman you’ve put out there in our one-on-one (the first was a purported trend in decreasing tolerance toward religion through executive order). With a track record like that, do you expect to be convinced. If you would like to discuss what I actually posted to you -- Posted 2 hours ago – (Any emergency would highlight the problems synergized by the confluence of the two trends; and, the trends are not caused by each other; and so, continued diligence in protecting religious freedom is warranted, irrespective of the legal outcomes so far), please post accordingly.
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 40 minutes ago, CV75 said: And yes, attitudes can flip very quickly. Look at the steady drops from 2003-2007: https://www.pewresearch.org/2007/10/15/trends-in-attitudes-toward-religion-and-social-issues-19872007/ We are talking about attitudes regarding religious liberty and executive orders and their trends. Show me those trends that are so concerning. This is a red herring. "Religious liberty" and "executive order" are not mentioned once in your link. 40 minutes ago, CV75 said: As far as trying to convince you that the pandemic itself is a real threat to religious liberty, that is the second a strawman you’ve put out there in our one-on-one (the first was a purported trend in decreasing tolerance toward religion through executive order). With a track record like that, do you expect to be convinced. I am addressing the OP. It is not a strawman: Quote Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Alito told Thursday’s meeting of the Federalist Society’s National Lawyer Convention that America’s First Amendment guarantees of religious liberty and freedom of speech are in grave danger, thanks in large part to state and local policies justified as responses to the Covid Pandemic 40 minutes ago, CV75 said: If you would like to discuss what I actually posted to you -- Posted 2 hours ago – (Any emergency would highlight the problems synergized by the confluence of the two trends; and, the trends are not caused by each other; and so, continued diligence in protecting religious freedom is warranted, irrespective of the legal outcomes so far), please post accordingly. No, I am not interested in addressing speculation without evidence. I will leave it up to you to convince me with general trends and actual information/data instead of the 3 anecdotes. I remain unconvinced. Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi
california boy Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 14 minutes ago, CV75 said: Looking at the 5-year trend on this listing (yes I considered that one days ago in my own googling), and excluding all other qualifiers, there is an increase. And yes, attitudes can flip very quickly. Look at the steady drops from 2003-2007: https://www.pewresearch.org/2007/10/15/trends-in-attitudes-toward-religion-and-social-issues-19872007/ As far as trying to convince you that the pandemic itself is a real threat to religious liberty, that is the second a strawman you’ve put out there in our one-on-one (the first was a purported trend in decreasing tolerance toward religion through executive order). With a track record like that, do you expect to be convinced. If you would like to discuss what I actually posted to you -- Posted 2 hours ago – (Any emergency would highlight the problems synergized by the confluence of the two trends; and, the trends are not caused by each other; and so, continued diligence in protecting religious freedom is warranted, irrespective of the legal outcomes so far), please post accordingly. The biggest drops that you are referring to are centered around two issues. Acceptance of homosexuals having equal rights including marriage and women being able to pursue the same opportunities as men. Wow that is a threat to religion?? I guess religion misses the days when demonizing homosexuals and suppressing women could gin up their base. As I said earlier in this thread, the biggest threat to religion is religion itself. In reading through this thread, the hand-wringing going on just because it is asked to be as responsible as possible in not being a major spreader of the Covid virus is astounding to me. You know what turns people off about religion? The hypocrisy of saying they care for others when demanding to gather in large groups and increase the spread of a DEADLY virus. Yeah. That sounds a lot like religion really cares for others. These kinds of demands are exactly what is causing more animosity towards religion. Especially when there is a perfectly safe way for religion to get together through Zoom. So yeah, push back all you want. Demand to be a super spreader of a deadly virus. I am sure that will endear more to your cause. I await the next Pew pole to see how you did in getting what you want.
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 9 minutes ago, california boy said: The biggest drops that you are referring to are centered around two issues. I did not have those two drops in mind; I didn't even look closely at the article, just the lines on the graphs. My point is that there were significant drops in 5 years to counter the false assertion that attitudes do not change quickly. What attitudes do you think had a significant steady decrease in the last five years)? None?
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, CV75 said: My point is that there were significant drops in 5 years to counter the false assertion that attitudes do not change quickly. What false assertion? Sure attitudes can change quickly - never claimed otherwise. I am addressing the unsubstantiated assertion that attitudes regarding religious liberty and executive orders are trending in bad directions. I just don't see any evidence of it currently. What I DO see however, is a concerning trend in mistrust of public health officials during a deadly pandemic - from many people claiming to uphold religious liberty. So misguided and dangerous for our nation. Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi 1
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 32 minutes ago, pogi said: We are talking about attitudes regarding religious liberty and executive orders and their trends. Show me those trends that are so concerning. This is a red herring. "Religious liberty" and "executive order" are not mentioned once in your link. I am addressing the OP. It is not a strawman: No, I am not interested in addressing speculation without evidence. I will leave it up to you to convince me with general trends and actual information/data instead of the 3 anecdotes. I remain unconvinced. The link shows that there were significant drops in 4-5 years to counter your false assertion that attitudes do not change quickly. What attitudes do you think had a steady decrease in the last five years? None? Okay… keep running with that. I gave you general trends and actual information/data on the quick (4-5-year) change in executive orders (up) and decrease in religiosity (down). They were extremely easy to Google, and I encourage you to do some more on your own time. “Speculation without evidence” is just more of your polemics, and I challenge you to try convince me that we needn’t be vigilant on protecting religious freedom with more of your polemics.
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, pogi said: What false assertion? Sure attitudes can change quickly - never claimed otherwise. I am addressing the unsubstantiated assertion that attitudes regarding religious liberty and executive orders are trending in bad directions. I just don't see any evidence of it currently. Your false assertion: "Where is the trend? One little blip by the current President doesn't represent a trend in attitudes." At least you now acknowledge that attitudes can change quickly. Whether the trend is good or bad or supported by evidence at all depends on your perspective and attitude.
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 20 minutes ago, CV75 said: The link shows that there were significant drops in 4-5 years to counter your false assertion that attitudes do not change quickly. Again, CFR about my so called "assertion". Talk about a strawman! 20 minutes ago, CV75 said: What attitudes do you think had a steady decrease in the last five years? None? Okay… keep running with that. I have no idea what you are talking about or where you are going with this. 20 minutes ago, CV75 said: I gave you general trends and actual information/data on the quick (4-5-year) change in executive orders (up) and decrease in religiosity (down). I must have missed the data for a 4-5 year trend in executive orders being up. Can you please repost it? Decrease in religiosity is not the same as a decreasing trend in favoring religious liberty. I don't know of anyone who has become inactive who doesn't still favor religious liberty. You are falsely assuming that one needs to be actively religious to support religious liberty. That is called a non sequitur. Furthermore, from your link (no major trends that I can see in religiosity): America Remains a Religious Nation 20 minutes ago, CV75 said: “Speculation without evidence” is just more of your polemics... Call it what you will, but it is true. It is what it is...speculation without evidence. It is funny, because I am the only one who has provided data regarding executive orders, all you have provided is polemics and unrelated data. Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 13 minutes ago, pogi said: What I DO see however, is a concerning trend in mistrust of public health officials during a deadly pandemic - from many people claiming to uphold religious liberty. So misguided and dangerous for our nation. RE: your edited statement: Governors and presidents are not public health officials. "Public" is the operative word in "public health emergency" so they have to deal with people where they are -- all stripes on all points in the spectrum, including political which is how the public works together. Most public health officials understand that is what they must navigate. The mistrust comes from all quarters. If it comes from the majority, the public health officials need to study and strategize for that, and most do. Alito's remarks have the pandemic as a backdrop, but the dynamics exist without an emergency of any kind and will continue when the pandemic is over.
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 6 minutes ago, pogi said: It is funny, because I am the only one who has provided data regarding executive orders, all you have provided is polemics and unrelated data. Now that is funny!
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 16 minutes ago, CV75 said: Your false assertion: "Where is the trend? One little blip by the current President doesn't represent a trend in attitudes." At least you now acknowledge that attitudes can change quickly. Whether the trend is good or bad or supported by evidence at all depends on your perspective and attitude. You accused me of saying that "attitudes cannot change quickly". Where did I say that? This does not answer my CFR. Secondly, how is my assertion you quoted above false?
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 11 minutes ago, CV75 said: and will continue when the pandemic is over. We shall see. Currently, I see no evidence.
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 10 minutes ago, CV75 said: Now that is funny! Show me the evidence. No more unrelated polls over 10 years old and anecdotes. I want to see actual trends in attitudes towards executive orders and religious liberty.
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 Just now, pogi said: You accused me of saying that "attitudes cannot change quickly". Where did I say that? This does not answer my CFR. Secondly, how is my assertion you quoted above false? I was paraphrasing of course, but the meaning is the same. "One little blip [5 years from the end of Obama's second term] doesn't represent a trend in attitudes." Well, it, it represents a 5-yaer trend in attitudes about executive orders, so "false."
pogi Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, CV75 said: I was paraphrasing of course No you were talking my words out of context and answering them with unrelated polls. 14 minutes ago, CV75 said: "One little blip [5 years from the end of Obama's second term] doesn't represent a trend in attitudes." Well, it, it represents a 5-yaer trend in attitudes about executive orders, so "false." Trump has not yet been in office for 4 years. One republican, right-leaning, religious liberty loving president slightly increasing use of executive orders (which he harshly criticized Obama for)does not represent a trend in "attitudes" about executive orders. It represents a change in 1 person's attitude. It is a blip. A trend would require several presidents increasing use of executive orders over time. A one term president doesn't represent a trend. Nor does it speak to over all attitudes. Edited November 17, 2020 by pogi
CV75 Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 1 minute ago, pogi said: Show me the evidence. No more unrelated polls over 10 years old and anecdotes. I want to see actual trends in attitudes towards executive orders and religious liberty. You are confusing the purpose of my old evidence. I'm not sure what you referring toby anecdotes. But I am sure you can find the actual trends you are looking for!
ksfisher Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 3 hours ago, pogi said: You simply are not connecting the pieces for me to believe there is any concerning trend that disfavors religious liberty and favors executive order. Highlighting the increased executive orders during a pandemic is not a trend and is completely justified and isolated. Where is the trend? One little blip by the current President doesn't represent a trend in attitudes. We are down to an average of 51 executive orders/year from a high of 307. Somehow our religious liberties have remained intact through all of it, including the major pandemic of 1918 when executive orders spiked and closed down churches across the country. Religious liberty is trending with winning battles in court. You haven't convinced me of anything. I am in no way suggesting that we should not defend religious liberties from real threats. I just don't think the pandemic is a real threat to religious liberty. I do think outcries for religious liberty in a time like this are a real threat to public health however. Executive Orders by President, Average Per Years in Office President Term Total Orders Avg/Year Yrs in Office EO Number Range George Washington Total 8 1 7.85 unnumbered John Adams Total 1 0.25 4.00 unnumbered Thomas Jefferson Total 4 0.50 8.00 unnumbered James Madison Total 1 0.13 8.00 unnumbered James Monroe Total 1 0.13 8.00 unnumbered John Quincy Adams Total 3 0.75 4.00 unnumbered Andrew Jackson Total 12 1.5 8.00 unnumbered Martin van Buren Total 10 2.5 4.00 unnumbered William Henry Harrison Total 0 0 0.08 unnumbered John Tyler Total 17 4.3 3.92 unnumbered James K. Polk Total 18 4.5 4.00 unnumbered Zachary Taylor Total 5 3.7 1.35 unnumbered Millard Fillmore Total 12 4.5 2.65 unnumbered Franklin Pierce Total 35 9 4.00 unnumbered James Buchanan Total 16 4 4.00 unnumbered Abraham Lincoln Total 48 12 4.12 unnumbered Andrew Johnson Total 79 20 3.89 unnumbered Ulysses S. Grant Total 217 27 8.00 unnumbered Rutherford B. Hayes Total 92 23 4.00 unnumbered James Garfield Total 6 11 0.55 unnumbered Chester Arthur Total 96 28 3.46 unnumbered Grover Cleveland - I Total 113 28 4.00 unnumbered Benjamin Harrison Total 143 36 4.00 unnumbered Grover Cleveland - II Total 140 35 4.00 unnumbered William McKinley Total 185 41 4.53 unnumbered Theodore Roosevelt Total 1,081 145 7.47 William Howard Taft Total 724 181 4.00 Woodrow Wilson Total 1,803 225 8.00 Warren G. Harding Total 522 217 2.41 Calvin Coolidge Total 1,203 215 5.59 Herbert Hoover Total 968 242 4.00 5075 - 6070 Franklin D. Roosevelt Total 3,721 307 12.12 6071 - 9537 Harry S. Truman Total 907 117 7.78 9538 - 10431 I 504 133 3.78 9538 - 10029 II 403 101 4.00 10030 - 10431 Dwight D. Eisenhower Total 484 61 8.00 10432 - 10913 I 266 67 4.00 10432 - 10695-A II 218 55 4.00 10696 - 10913 John F. Kennedy Total 214 75 2.84 10914 - 11127 Lyndon B. Johnson Total 325 63 5.17 11128 - 11451 Richard Nixon Total 346 62 5.55 11452 - 11797 I 247 62 4.00 11452 - 11698 II 99 64 1.55 11699 - 11797 Gerald R. Ford Total 169 69 2.45 11798 - 11966 Jimmy Carter Total 320 80 4.00 11967 - 12286 Ronald Reagan Total 381 48 8.00 12287 - 12667 I 213 53 4.00 12287 - 12499 II 168 42 4.00 12500 - 12667 George Bush Total 166 42 4.00 12668 - 12833 William J. Clinton Total 364 46 8.00 12834 - 13197 I 200 50 4.00 12834 - 13033 II 164 41 4.00 13034 - 13197 George W. Bush Total 291 36 8.00 13198 - 13488 I 173 43 4.00 13198 - 13370 II 118 30 4.00 13371 - 13488 Barack Obama Total 276 35 8.00 13489 - 13764 I 147 37 4.00 13489 - 13635 II 129 32 4.00 13636 - 13764 Donald J. Trump Total 192 51 3.75 13765 - 13956 Note: EO counts are usually updated monthly following the 20th day of the month to recompute average per year. Orders issued between updates can be accessed here on the Executive Orders page This is extremely interesting. I wonder why the increase, then subsequent decrease of executive orders by early 20th century presidents (T Roosevelt, Taft, Harding, Coolidge). I would assume many of Wilson's had to do with WWI. I wonder if he issued any in response to the Spanish Flu. 1
california boy Posted November 17, 2020 Posted November 17, 2020 32 minutes ago, CV75 said: I did not have those two drops in mind; I didn't even look closely at the article, just the lines on the graphs. My point is that there were significant drops in 5 years to counter the false assertion that attitudes do not change quickly. What attitudes do you think had a significant steady decrease in the last five years)? None? Clearly religion has lost its grip on vilifying homosexuals and women having equal opportunities to pursue their goals as me. That is what the data says that you yourself pointed to. Is that a bad thing? Decline of Christianity is also continuing at a rapid pace as reported in this Pew Study. Do you think those two things might just possibly be related?
Recommended Posts