“She says she was then told, however, that she must stop holding “religious assemblies” until she and her husband obtain a Major Use Permit from the county, a permit that often involves traffic and environmental studies, compliance with parking and sidewalk regulations and costs that top tens of thousands of dollars.”
Note the first question was did they hold regular weekly meetings there.
It is absolutely true that to hold religious assemblies at a private home in a residential zone, which may impact traffic, noise, parking, sidewalks, etc., you need to apply for the permit.
Absolutely true. And if those same-size meetings were the boy scouts of america or the local meat-cutters union or any group which would similarly affect the neighborhood on a weekly basis, the rule would be exactly the same.
I think we’re paying too much attention to what the compliance officer supposedly said to the pastor’s wife. If she asked questions in order to determine that the nature of the meetings was “religious assemblies”, then so be it. The fact of the matter is that religious assemblies are one of the (many many) categories listed for which you need a Major Use Permit.
In my other comments I make clear that this is not a violation of anybody’s free exercise.
These are people who are voluntarily studying the bible—it’s a visit, a get together. In the social sense it’s no different than book clubs, garden club, knitting clubs—no fees, no dues, just God fearing, God loving people supplementing their knowledge on their own time. Exchanging thoughts and ideas with each other to grow and learn. It’s no different than tutoring students...
The difference in this case is persecution...for the Gall to study the bible in the privacy of a private home.
You are assuming that the amount of traffic and parking is enough to warrant a study.
I am assuming, based on a number of similar cases across the country in recent years, that there is not enough traffic etc. to justify a study, and that the officer targeted the family because of the religous nature of the meetings.
In a week or two we’ll see whose assumption is correct.
It didn’t take a week for the county to back down, it only took a day.
You’re assumption was wrong, mine was right. My assumption that this was really over the fact that this was a religous service is based on the fact that this happens time and again all accross the county, and those incidents that get news exposure get resolved very quickly in favor of the religous household.