Featured Image
 RTimages / Shutterstock.com

November 20, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — If the coronavirus crisis is as serious as they say it is, leaders should help establish the credibility of the threat. In many places, they are failing miserably. In many jurisdictions, measures adopted supposedly to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic appear to be biased against virtue and in favor of vice.

Indeed, many officials act as if sin, unrest, and vice help contain the virus. Religious gatherings, however, are automatically labeled super-spreader events, a threat to public health. Such unfair treatment undermines the credibility of efforts to control the pandemic. Worse yet, no one seems to care about such an obvious conclusion.   

Opening strip clubs as a First Amendment right

For example, California Christians were perplexed by the recent ruling of a San Diego judge who said strip clubs cannot be closed during COVID-19 restrictions. They must be allowed to reopen “to provide live adult entertainment” as an expression of their First Amendment rights.

Places of worship presented identical arguments to state officials. Yet, for months, churches remained closed or are subject to arbitrary and absurd restrictions on indoor and outdoor services. The First Amendment explicitly mentions worship. Authorities could not care less. Strip clubs, however, matter greatly to them.

Bias against worship

This government bias is not new. It seems to be a reoccurring precedent. Early in the lockdowns, churchgoers were shocked to find religious worship shut down as “non-essential,” while abortion facilities and marijuana dispensaries were classified as essential services. “Mostly peaceful” protests and riots also appeared to be exempt from coronavirus restrictions. Public officials even attended marches and other events where compliance with “social distancing” and masking norms was not observed. The Portland, Oregon nightly riots were deemed an expression of First Amendment rights. Rioters there were not reading Bibles, but burning them.  

Decisions like the San Diego ruling highlight the unfair and arbitrary nature of the virus restrictions.  Moreover, the criterion for judgment is not revered science, so often cited by liberals as the justification for everything. Officials are giving free rein to sin and vice. Their assessments just happen to coincide with the hostile attitudes of liberal judges, governors, and other “enlightened” officials toward religion. 

A ‘swinger convention’ in New Orleans

Another example of liberal bias is the recent swingers’ convention in New Orleans. Hundreds of “swingers” descended upon the city to swap partners and potentially expose others in close sexual proximity. The four-day affair, called “Naughty in Nawlins,” took place as a “surge” of COVID-19 cases nationwide prompted many communities to enact more restrictions.

Nevertheless, the program of the event is a marathon of opportunities for exposure and close contacts. It includes a clothing-optional cruise, rooftop pool parties, matchmaking events, an “Erotic Ball,” and seminars on flogging. The group will also visit and party on Bourbon Street in downtown New Orleans. Organizers insist that masks will be worn and activities will be divided into smaller than normal groups.

However, the event occurs when city officials warned of a spike in COVID-19 cases in the city, which they blamed on Halloween festivities and university parties. They said there is a “short window of time” to take measures before implementing stricter rules that would prevent large gatherings like the swingers’ convention from happening.

Vice appears to enjoy “Most Favored Status” in the city. The most immoral activities are considered part of the city’s coronavirus recovery program. In early November, an open-air concert by Christian social media influencer Sean Feucht drew 400 attendees who were not adequately masked. Unlike the university parties, the event drew outrage from the mayor’s office.

Sending the wrong message

Such favoring of sin sends a mixed message: promiscuity will be promoted while virtuous action in other sectors will be restricted.

Officials ask the population to stay away from one another and avoid unnecessary contact while at the same time promoting the most intimate of contacts. People are told to change their daily lives radically, while others can freely gratify their vices.

Restricting Mass, sacraments, and church prayer while allowing a swingers’ convention and strip clubs is contradictory. If the key to containing COVID-19 is a spirit of restraint, why promote swingers and strip clubs, which channel unrestraint and a disregard for all rules of morality?

Excluding and scorning God

Finally, the official response to the coronavirus outbreak is a naturalistic and atheistic attitude that excludes God from any containment strategy. God is deemed non-essential. The response goes one step farther by facilitating sins and vices that offend God and destroy society. These officials undermine their efforts and scorn Christians, giving them reasons to doubt their impartiality.  

How can people take the coronavirus measures seriously when they exclude out of hand the supernatural means through which real solutions come? A proper response would be to call upon God, who can do all things, to mitigate the virus’s devastation. Ignoring God is a foolish policy. It always ends in disaster.

John Horvat II is a scholar, researcher, educator, international speaker, and author of the book Return to Order, as well as the author of hundreds of published articles. He lives in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania, where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property.