Posted on 06/28/2005 7:37:31 AM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-7 pings/day).
This list is pinged by sionnsar and newheart.
Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15
They can take all the liberal churches and ALL the mosques, as far as I'm concerned.
All we have to do is put a Koran on every pew.
With this ruling, someone enterprising needs to relieve Justices Kennedy, Bader Ginsburg, and the other abominations of their homes and land holdings in order to build something that will produce more tax revenue.
ping
Probably not. They'll just turn the cheek and grab ankles like they have in the past.
Then people will start worshipping in their homes in groups, and the govt will tax the "group" since they are by definition a "church" in their own home. Ah, more taxes...lovely.
kewl..most excellent..
It seems strange, but it's a good thing some of the big, beautiful ones here are on the National Register of Historic Places. That goes for my neighborhood, too.
Not that that would stop a serious developer, but...
Does your omission of Souter indicate that you expect the guy petitioning Souter's town council to purchase Souter's land to build The Lost Liberty Hotel is a shoo-in to succeed? Hope so! ;-)
Grave yards have frequently been moved for road and rail projects.
I'm not sure it matters in this context, judging from the protests about church closings in Boston. Even if they're only "cultural Catholics," they'll have a visceral opposition! IMHO, of course.
The exemption of religious institutions from taxes is a part of English Common Law, coming down from the Imperial Edicts of the Roman Empire that pre-date Christianity.
It is not a grant of a privilege, but a naturally held privilege of religion, just like our freedom of speech and association and the like.
You may be right, but apparently this doesn't extend to mosques. In Boston (a city with already astronomical and still rising real estate prices, in case you hadn't heard), there was some noise a month or two ago about a new Muslim center in the works. The deal stinks (like so much of Mayor Menino's sweetheart deals) in that they got the land from the city at significantly below market. Nothing has actually broken yet, but I certainly hope someone's investigating.
She said we're past that awkward stage.
I have come to realize there is no one to represent the common man. Both parties are elitists. They don't give a f*** about us.
I will never vote Republican as long as I live so long as they continue to act this way.
Of course, I never could vote Democrat.
That leaves third-parties.
If you think ANYthing will constrain the SCOTUS, you are sadly mistaken.
================================
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.
Yes, my communication with the RNC on this subject has been received with a nice "thank you for your concern, we will let the management know of it". Not exactly heart-warming.
10,000 armed men in front of the court might.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.