Interaction of Church, State, and Constitution in the Pandemic Environment Valeriia Manchak MA Public

Coronavirus Communication: Interaction of Church, State, and Constitution in the Pandemic Environment Valeriia Manchak MA Public Policy Dr. Kahlib Fischer This paper is written by Valeriia Manchak, graduate student, public policy major. Undergraduate and master's degree received back in Ukraine through National Law University in legal studies/law concentration. Playing hockey for D1 Women's hockey team. Career plans - working for the INGOs such as United Nation or European Union with a concentration Ukraine- USA-Russia Relationship. Next year planning to pursue PhD online at Liberty University in foreign policy and MA in Strategic Communication, keep playing college hockey for two more years. Introduction This paper investigates the response to Covid-19 by examining the communication problem between the government and religious institutions. During the outbreak, some faith- based organizations used religion-abetted value judgments which affected viral spread (Whitehead and Perry 2020). Religious institutions can also inspire people to be supportive while the world endures hard times. (Wildman, Bulbulia and et al. 2020). This paper will explain where churches have contributed to the challenges of dealing with the COVID virus and provide recommendations for the better response (Wildman, Bulbulia and et al. 2020). This paper also discusses where the government violated constitutional rights and how to fix these issues in the future. This research encourages government institutions to look at medical data presented in the article about impact that Covid-19 had on Americans' mental health and consider the medical ramifications of reopening churches to help hospitals fight depression and anxiety. Problem Overview Current polls and rapid‐response studies of Burge and Fowler presented data showing that individuals identified as religious or religiously conservative were more likely to disbelieve scientific sources and less likely to social distance, wear masks, or otherwise take recommended precautionary measures while more secular Americans were more likely to follow these guidelines (Burge 2020). Additionally, American Christians are 13% less likely to wear masks in public compared to the general population (58.7% vs. 71.8%) (Burge 2020). This may be because Christians are reported at being 9% less likely to say that they are "somewhat" or "very" worried about being infected by the virus than American people in general (Burge 2020). These views may have been due to political polarization and hindered strategies to curtail the pandemic’s spread (Hill et al., 2020). A recent Gallup Poll research group investigated the impact of religious groups on personal health. They tested the theory that COVID-19 will cause a loss of faith but discovered that the COVID-19 crisis has enhanced spirituality and religion for many Americans and aided to cope with anxiety and depression (Newport 2020). With the Covid 19 pandemic, 19% of those interviewed felt their faith or spirituality had "gotten better" during the crisis (Newport 2020). Gallup senior expert and scientist Frank Newport, Ph.D., noticed that "One of the traditional roles of religious individuals and religious entities has been to bring a helpful, integrative, pro- social, charitable behavior function in crises." (Newport 2020). There are three different problems between Evangelical representatives and the government. First, church leaders see closing churches as a political act and not a health caution (Burge 2020). Second, the government violated the people's rights through unequal treatment. The third problem is miscommunication between church leaders and government during any pandemic (Evans 2020). The lack of dialogue and trust can lead to churches being large centers spreading coronavirus (Mass Legal Services 2020). For example, the New York Times posted database claiming that at least 650 coronavirus cases have been directly linked to approximately 40 churches and religious events (Evans 2020). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention council stated that the virus can spread at large gatherings and infect more people. They cited a case where two church guests infected 35 others with Covid 19 at a church event in Arkansas (Evans 2020). After Colorado's governor issued a statewide rule mandating masks, church members at New Life Church in Colorado did not follow this restriction (Mass Legal Services Source 2020). In Arkansas, three people died, and many church attendants tested positive in March after being exposed to two people who showed up at a church function with COVID symptoms. In Washington state, dozens of choral group members were infected after a single symptomatic person attended a 2½-hour practice. Two people died. (Hammer and et. All 2020). Criteria for success The first criteria are that health authorities and the government need to plan for a strong communication network with religious leaders that can react accordingly as soon as a potential epidemic emerges. It should be legal within the Constitution's framework and involve church leaders to help organize aspects of the nation's spiritual life (Briskey 2020). Currently, politicians are viewed with distrust, so religious leaders may help ensure greater compliance by assisting people in following potentially life-saving advice. The second criteria are that churches that do not follow guidelines should be subject to penalties for the actual harm they cause. Third, churches should use more time on the media channels to inspire people to be more patient and calmer (Briskey 2010). The fourth criteria is that the solution will help fight fake news and bring lasting solutions to disinformation through regulatory changes while maintaining the media's rights. These regulations will help supply context and expand beneficial friction as near-term, aggressive moderation methods for coronavirus misinformation (Simpson and Connor 2020). The Media should require significant resources and enhanced clarity to confirm that they can curb false or harmful content about the pandemic and not mistakenly penalize the critical work of the press, public health organizations, advocates, and civil society (Simpson and Connor 2020). The fifth criteria is that church leaders should stand up and fight for their community's rights, both political and health. They need to maintain religious freedom, but not at the cost of their communities' health. They should fight for staying open with a developed safety plan, keeping cultural and religious life going during pandemic threats (The Heritage Foundation 2020). One more idea presented by the Brooking Institute is that the United States should create a permanent federal health communications unit to build a system of connections between local, state, and federal health authorities. It will help establish and regulate public communications strategies based on the latest health communications research (Tworek 2020). Medical Perspective on Reopening Churches The latest study provided by Boston University in association with the JAVA Psychiatry group showes that the prevalence of depression symptoms was more than 3-fold higher during COVID-19 compared with the latest population-based estimates of mental health disease in the US (Ettman, Abdalla, and et al., 2020, 9-15). This growth in depression symptom predominance is higher than that recorded after previous mass traumatic events. This likely demonstrates the far more pervasive effect of COVID-19 and its social and economic consequences than other, previously explored mass traumatic events (Beusekom 2020). The results showed that 27.8% of adults reported depression symptoms, in contrast with 8.5% before the pandemic. Increases were higher across the spectrum of depression severity, from mild (24.6% vs. 16.2% before the pandemic) to severe (5.1% vs. 0.7%) (Healthline 2020). Today, the large-scale psychological impacts intensify the need for mental health care across the population (Amsalem, Dixon and Neria 2020, 5-9). Therefore, Christian leaders, organizations, and churches can be additional mental health resources (Miller 2020). In the research work written by Fruehwirth, Iyer, and Zhang, they proved that religiosity positively affects depression. In particular, a one-unit advance in religiosity, e.g., coming to the church service one more time a month, declines the odds of being depressed by 3% out of a probability of 24% (Fruehwirth, Iyer and Zhang 2016, 1-7). JAMA Psychiatry published a study showing that meditation or any other form of regular spiritual practice along with attending a church was related to a thickening of the brain cortex (Miller, Bansal and et al. 2014, 89-94). The study was the first to explore physical changes in the brain associated with the protective effects of faith against depression (Miller, Bansal and et al. 2014). The impressive part of the study was that the MRI images demonstrated thicker cortices in those participants who established high importance on religion or spirituality than those who did not (Johnson 2020). Shutting down churches and pastoral counseling, even when they follow the rules, can have a negative impact on the resiliency of the populous. This situation must be examined from the medical, legal, and religious perspectives (Amsalem, Dixon and Neria 2020, 5-9). Research and Data Analysis of Lockdown Policies The graphic above from a Pew Research Center analysis, posted in May, presented state religious restrictions (Villa 2020). The map was updated with numbers in red, which illustrate the specific

Load more