Dear Joseph,
I apologize. I was focusing on the second point, and did not think how to write out the first one. The First Amendment is aimed against forcing any set of beliefs on the people. It enables any religious expression people choose, but it does not enshrine that people will have religious worship. It does preclude any curtailing of free speech.
That was what I meant. But know I think it could be read as all having to do with the right to assemble. Meaning, that religion is being enshrined through the masses right to assemble. (And the right to religious freedom is to be read implicitly into the constitution itself.) Accordingly, the double standard is obvious. [Just according to this interpretation, i am unsure why the Government is allowed to order a lockdown to begin with.]
In conclusion I think I made it clear that I do not know much about how this works out in everyday legislation and government. Since this thread is all over the place, maybe someone can clear it up for me. But I still think that the Governors were thinking along the first reading when managing two different public crises. Which lead into my second point; But the idea here was that religious people would be careful about social distancing, because they tend to be more conscious of the communal good. [As opposed to their own personal right.]
Menu