Amish community fined nearly $300,000 for failing to download ArriveCan app

[Lee]

Quote

 

Ontario’s Amish community is under siege, facing unprecedented fines and legal hurdles due to their refusal to comply with digital mandates. Here's why this is a travesty.

In the serene countryside of Chatsworth, a community of Amish farmers lives as if in the 18th century, adhering strictly to their faith and traditions.

Their simple way of life — without electricity, telephones, or the internet — sets them apart from the rest of the modern world. Yet, this peaceful community is now grappling with a problem no one would have expected: a heavy-handed government bent on enforcing digital compliance.

The Amish, originally from Europe, found refuge in North America, escaping persecution in countries like the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland.

They settled in regions like Pennsylvania in the United States, and Canada, where they could live according to their beliefs. Hollywood has often romanticized the Amish way of life, as seen in the Harrison Ford movie Witness, which highlighted their detachment from modern society. However, the reality is far from idyllic, especially now, as the community faces a new form of persecution.

The problem began with the Canadian government's enforcement of the ArriveCan app during the COVID-19 pandemic. This app was mandatory for anyone entering Canada, requiring travellers to submit their health information digitally.

The Amish, however, do not use smartphones, let alone apps. They also have religious exemptions from vaccinations, making the use of such technology unnecessary and intrusive for them. Yet, despite these clear exemptions, the government insisted on compliance, leading to severe penalties.

The result? The Amish community in Chatsworth has been slapped with nearly $300,000 in fines for not using the ArriveCan app. This is a community that doesn’t use electricity, let alone digital applications.

The fines were not just a bureaucratic oversight — they were a targeted action. The government even went so far as to place liens on their properties, effectively freezing their ability to obtain loans and transfer land titles within families. These punitive measures have left the Amish community in a state of shock and despair.

Imagine being a farmer in need of a loan to buy cattle, only to be told that your property has a lien on it because of fines related to an app you cannot even use.

This situation is not just an attack on the Amish economy; it’s a direct assault on their religious freedoms. The government’s actions have created an uneven playing field, where a community that lives without modern conveniences is being punished for not participating in a digital system. It’s a blatant case of bureaucratic bullying, and it’s happening right under our noses.

Fortunately, The Democracy Fund has stepped in. They’ve begun taking up the cases of these Amish families, working to overturn the unjust fines and remove the liens placed on their properties. However, the road ahead is long and fraught with challenges, especially given the unique nature of the Amish community’s way of life.

The Amish may not fight back themselves — they are pacifists by nature — but they have welcomed the help of others who see the injustice in what’s happening.

This is not just a fight for the Amish; it’s a fight for religious freedom and the right to live according to one’s beliefs without government interference.

It’s time to stand with the Amish and ensure that their way of life, so different yet so enriching to the fabric of our society, is protected from unwarranted government intrusion.

 

https://www.rebelnews.com/amish_community_under_attack_over_digital_mandates_they_didnt_know_existed

[OnMyWay]

Canada is such a mess now

[Lee]

There's lots of stupidity to go around----not just Canada.

Quote

 

Not Lovin' it: Woman is fined £200 for 'littering' by jobsworth council officer after she accidentally dropped McDonald's fries on ground before greedy seagull snapped them up

A mother-of-three is fighting council jobsworths who fined her £200 for accidentally dropping two McDonald's chips - even though a seagull ate them.

'As I was eating my quarter-pounder meal I dropped a couple of chips on the floor by accident and a seagull just came and ate them, like they do,' Mrs Clarke added.

'Then about thirty seconds later, this environment officer came out from behind the car.

'We didn’t see any proper ID, he just flashed it very quickly and didn’t let us look at it before he said that we’re not allowed to do that with the chips and we’ve just littered.'  

But Mrs Clarke decided to fight the fine arguing: 'I’m appealing the £200 fine because I don’t have the money in my bank account to pay it.

'I genuinely can’t pay it, it would mean I can’t feed my children for a week.'

A council spokesman said 'We are currently reviewing the matter and can’t comment on an active investigation.'

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13446319/Not-Lovin-Woman-fined-200-littering-jobsworth-council-officer-accidentally-dropped-McDonalds-fries-ground-greedy-seagull-snapped-up.html

[scott h]

There is something fishy about this Amish thing. I could tell by the tone of the article that it was not an objective news item. So I looked them up and it seems "rebelnews" is a far-right outfit with an axe to grind. Try as I might I could not find any other news articles about this incident. In fact when I googled about it, Lee's post was even listed, nothing else.

So even though I am a right-of-center type guy myself, I am not going to get outraged until some unbiased information comes out.

[Mike J]

16 minutes ago, Lee said:

There's lots of stupidity to go around----not just Canada.

Agree, but in this case I tend to think the lady was feeding the seagulls.

[scott h]

2 minutes ago, Mike J said:

I tend to think the lady was feeding the seagulls

 

19 minutes ago, Lee said:

We are currently reviewing the matter and can’t comment on an active investigation

Agreed Mike. What the article doesn't mention is if there is a sign posted about not feeding the birds. Nor that some poor slob who earns peanuts from the city was just doing his job and writes her a ticket like he is supposed to. 

22 minutes ago, Lee said:

he just flashed it very quickly

Besides this isn't the Philippines, the guy actually wrote her a ticket and didn't take Merianda money.  

[BrettGC]

50 minutes ago, scott h said:

I am not going to get outraged until some unbiased information comes out.

My thought exactly after I perused the other articles on the site. I did find another article on a site called "Farmers Forum" but it mainly references the Rebel News article but in a more toned down manner but definitely very partisan as well. 

[Lee]

1 hour ago, scott h said:

What the article doesn't mention is if there is a sign posted about not feeding the birds.

Is feeding seagulls that flock to a coastal town so important as to warrant signage and to employ somebody to monitor compliance?

Either way, the seagulls aren't going away so what's the point?

[scott h]

4 minutes ago, Lee said:

so what's the point?

The point is that journalism nowadays has become sloppy and is more concerned with "clicks" than informing the public with a complete and objective picture. Sometimes I spend more time fact checking the news than I do reading it. 

The Philippines is not alone with nonsensical laws and law enforcement, as the above shows. Heck, there is still a law on the books in San Fransisco from the 1800's that forbids a person from watering their horse in a hotel room. 

12 minutes ago, Lee said:

Is feeding seagulls that flock to a coastal town so important as to warrant signage and to employ somebody to monitor compliance?

Obviously, there is. Many times, all over the world I have seen signage that says, "Don't feed the birds (cats, dogs or animals)" in public places. Seagulls can get aggressive, more than once the little bastards actually tore open c-ration cans or MRE pouches and ate my food!

Now if the story had said "lady observed littering, given ticket, went to the council, pleaded her case, was found guilty (or innocent) etc. the public would have been informed. But that would not create the sense of outrage or ridicule that journalism seems to want to provide now.

[Lee]

1 hour ago, scott h said:

Now if the story had said "lady observed littering, given ticket, went to the council, pleaded her case, was found guilty (or innocent)

So what if the lady was telling the truth about how the chips hit the deck?

As we weren't there, how can you assume that she is lying about the wayward fried potatoes?