The disturbing thing is that to argue that it even has anything to DO with property rights/religious freedom is to completely miss the point. It is a question of taste, sensitivity, morality, and even hypocrisy. You know damn well that if some religious group of white separatists wanted to build something next to the birthplace of MLK those same people would be screaming blue murder and any question of property rights/religious freedom would not be on the radar anywhere.
Yes they CAN legally build there, but the question is SHOULD THEY? no, they should not. Especially since their stated purpose in doing so [building bridges, outreach etc] flies in the face given the very obvious reaction by people with whom they presumably want to build bridges.
I said the same thing.