“(1) EQUAL TERMS- No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that treats a religious assembly or institution on less than equal terms with a nonreligious assembly or institution. (2) NONDISCRIMINATION- No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation that discriminates against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination.”
Don’t get me wrong, I emotionally oppose this mosque to the fullest. But we conservatives can’t play both sides of the fence. Thats what liberals do. If I apply conservative values of property rights, I have to be conservative based on the letter of the law. I hope the place burns down.
My intent is to support RP’s interpretation of what’s true. And he’s spot on.
Except you left out the part about the state department funding the fundraising trip for this mosque. How does that square with Reverend Ron and his Church of Constitutional Purity?
Don’t freaking BS, ok? It’s not a mosque, it’s not religion... it’s a victory flag planted right where they smacked us all down.
How are they violating that section? Were religious buildings at that site before? Are other churches being built there, but not the mosque?