Experts Warn Houses of Worship at Risk After Court Ruling

Christianity Today ^ | 6/27/05 | Yogita Patel

[rhema]

Religious institutions may be more vulnerable to takeover through eminent domain after Thursday's (June 23) Supreme Court ruling that gives local governments greater power to seize properties for private economic development, according to some religious and civil rights advocacy groups.

Churches, mosques, synagogues and other nonprofit religious entities are considered especially at threat because they generate no tax revenue for cities, while developments like hotels or shopping malls are seen to be economic boons for urban renewal projects.

"Because all houses of worship are tax-exempt, they will continue to be attractive targets for seizure by revenue-hungry local governments," said Jared Leland, media and legal counsel of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

The Becket Fund is a nonprofit, interfaith legal organization that advocates for the free expression of religion.

The Becket Fund, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Rutherford Institute and many other groups filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of seven residents of New London, Conn., who were fighting the city's decision to raze their homes to allow private developers to build a commercial complex.

Leland warned that taking land and property strictly for economic interests is a dangerous slippery slope, and said religious organizations threatened by this decision offer communities services and aid that are immeasurable by monetary standards.

"Religion is something that may not have an economic impact on communities, but does have a tremendous social impact on communities." Leland said. "Religious institutions should be welcomed and protected in the land-use matter."

John Whitehead, president of the Rutherford Institute, said public furor may protect some religious institutions from takeovers, but warned they still will be vulnerable.

"If push comes to shove, churches, synagogues and anyone who they don't consider tax-generating entities will come under this," Whitehead said.

[Sybeck1]

Would a liberal mayor or city council see it correct to remove more conservative churches this way? They cause division in their thoughts.

[funkywbr]

Wanna erally pee off the LIBS, go after the NYC Church of Scientology buildings!~}

[Alia]

Would a liberal mayor or city council see it correct to remove more conservative churches this way?

Why not? They've locked people out using more "progressive means". Now they can use the RE "commercial development" ruling, and do it far more openly.

They cause division in their thoughts.

They always have caused great divisions -- this is what liberals do: Divide people.

[azhenfud]

Any time government is granted a new power, it is solely at the expense of the governed.

[Aquinasfan]

When they kick out your frontdoor
How you gonna come?
With your hands on your head
Or on the trigger of your gun?

This could be an eye-opener for the liberal clergy. Unfortunately, I expect almost 100% capitulation.

[RightWhale]

"Because all houses of worship are tax-exempt

How much longer will that last?

[PAR35]

There you go introducing relevant facts into a thread.

[4himinct]

>>This is just another step in the the 'rats war against Christianity. They'll start siezing churches 'for the greater good.'<<

It is not a Democrat attack. It is BOTH parties. Our REPUBLICAN President and Congress have not shown absolute outrage on this at all, as would be expected if they actually represented American values, like the Founding Fathers, who would be in arms over this. The useless ones in both parties(99%+) have said nada.

His,

Bob Z>.

But........the "lesser of two evi9ls" party will still get the votes.

[steveegg]

Whether that will stand up in the now out-of-control USSC court, given their recent rulings, remains to be seen.

That's the key line. One would have thought that the homeowners in Connecticut had the Constitution and case law behind them. In fact, I'd expect a taking of church (or other tax-exempt) land to be the next eminent domain case before SCOTUS, and even money says that will enter the courts by Christmas this year.

[steveegg]

I think the NYC government would have a real problem on their hands if they did something that stupid, since the majority of the police and fire departments are Catholic!

Practicing, or CINOs?

[hunter112]

How much longer will that last?

Maybe this is a good reason to start taxing church properties. If they generate tax revenue, the same as any other entity, it will be harder to make a case that there will be a public benefit by seizing them for taxable development.

In any case, tax exemption for churches is a public subsidy for them. It's only a matter of time before the SCOTUS comes to the same conclusion.

[RightWhale]

Yes, that appears to be true. They don't promote any particular religion, though. In fact, there are some marginal organizations claiming religious status to get the tax benefit.

[hunter112]

Scientology comes to mind, but maybe that's because Tom Cruise's face is all over the supermarket checkout stand lately...

[RedwineisJesus]

"""We religious folks can be pretty powerful when we're mad."""

And pretty mad when we're powerful.

Isn't it time SOMEONE applied a little madness in the fight on terror, thus making it go away?

GO BENNY GO !!! GO BENNY GO !!! GO BENNY GO !!!

[RobbyS]

I remember reading somewhere that the Church sought to buy the property in front of Saint Patrick's that is now occupied by Rockefeller Center but was blocked by local government hostile to the Church. True or false?

[CDHart]

All of these churches who have been complaining about not being able to talk about politics without losing their tax-exempt status really irk me. They should have known that whenever you accept something from government there will be a payment required at some point. I sent a message to Coral Ridge Ministries asking them why they didn't just give up their tax-exempt status -- problem solved. No answer yet.

Carolyn

[funkywbr]

Haven't lived in NY for a long while so dont really know or care.

[highball]

It is not a Democrat attack. It is BOTH parties. Our REPUBLICAN President and Congress have not shown absolute outrage on this at all, as would be expected if they actually represented American values, like the Founding Fathers, who would be in arms over this. The useless ones in both parties(99%+) have said nada.

Sad but true. Where's the outrage from the Republicans? Nothing on the RNC's site, nothing on the White House's site.

That's outrageous. Failing to criticize this decision is to support it.

[BelegStrongbow]

Trad Ang ping list?

[sionnsar]

Trad Ang ping list?

Yes. I didn't click through, but this could be a threat. Although in my locale it's more likely the megachurches to be targeted. (Give me a couple more days, when I'm home, and the Trad-Anglican ping list will return to normal. I think newheart is traveling also.)