Lets say that something that is allowed is putting someone at 50% risk and something that isn't allowed is putting someone at 25% risk. You think that is going to be a winning argument?
If the restriction of the lesser risk is a constitutional violation, while the higher is not, and the higher is allowed? Yes, that should be a clear shown example of how the law is violating my rights, when i should have a right to do something. The fact that they allow me to be near people in one place, but not in a place of worship shows that the law is clearly biased against religion.