Well, so was your blanket challenge "that people are not allowed to use their home anytime they wish to entertain in any manner they wish?" Fact of the matter is, no, you aren't. There are all sorts of restrictions, most of the reasonable so nobody gets jacked-up over them.
-- The federal Constitution prohibits [regulation of "religious, fraternal or non-profit" organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit.] --
It prohibits zoning being applied to churches?
-- This is a private residence. --
Yes it is. But you said that the constitution prohibits [what you said, above], and one of those is churches.
-- I can't believe that a "conservative" is arguing for government control of private property and religious issues. --
Land use restrictions are pretty common. It's unusual to find a person saying they are unconstitutional.
-- I am not now, nor will I ever be, one of governments Pavlov dogs. --
So, can I put that tankcar load of gunpowder on my property, next to YOUR house?
Yeah, I know, that's a nuts example.
But land use is not an unconstitutional undertaking by the government, and sometimes land use is applied to an organization that is a church (not that this is, and I've argued this case is decided simply on "character of the neighborhood" grounds).
Um, no. Having company on a property big enough for a barn and coral is quite different than a tanker of explosives. Your analogy was absurd.
The federal government is prohibited from regulating religion no matter the setting.
These people are not making noise as there is no signing and they have a large property. Explain to me why gathering to read the Bible should be regulated by any government entity.
I am not now, nor will I ever be, one of governments Pavlov dogs.