Regarding gathering for religious purposes, I find myself, as so often, treading a middle path, but I do have one particular perspective that is not middling at all, I think.
Prohibiting large gatherings of people in tightly confined spaces seems like a pretty reasonable regulation at this time. If these folks wanted to gather and stay together for the duration, that would be their choice, but there is a real prospect that they will get infected there and take it elsewhere. As long as the rule is applied even-handedly to all gatherings, not just religious ones, and as long as no particular faiths or religious groups are targeted, the law is not noxious.
But we should bear in mind that this imposes much greater hardships on some people than on others. For some, church gatherings are their primary opportunity for social contact. Psychologists now tell us that social isolation is one of the most damaging punishments we can impose on people; it does real psychological damage. Let's NOT pretend we may not be psychologically damaging some people.
Drive-in services should be allowed. There are concerns about kids needing the bathroom, so people going in and out of the church, but that is an organisationally manageable issue. It does not rise to the level of problem that legitimates prohibiting people from sitting in their cars in a parking lot waving at each other while listening to a sermon on the radio.
Congregations of all faiths are temporarily shut down. I've checked the web-pages of Muslim, Jewish, and Christian congregations and read their messages of closure and continuing ministerial communications of support for their congregants. Those Christian ministers who are loudly announcing that they are going to violate the ban and hold in-church services should give deep and thoughtful consideration to whether their motives are truly spiritual, or whether they are prosaically profane, self-aggrandising, in pursuit of some kind of reward, even if non-tangible, in this world rather than in the next.
