Netizen, if you are addressing what I stated, it is courtesy to include me in the “To” box,
That said, “He also said “the meeting would still be ILLEGAL without a permit, based on what was being discussed at the meeting.”
I stand by that. What makes a “religious group” a “religious group”?
It is what they SAY, DO, or the LITERATURE pass out.
I am not limiting this to “religious speech.”
My point is government toes not have the right to require a permit for ANY speech in someone’s home.
Would you be okay if the government required a permit for you and ten of your friends to to discuss Obama in your home?
What’s the big difference, liberty-wise?
My point, which you persistently either overloook or reject, is that the code is aimed at externalities, not at the subject matter being discussed on the property; religious meetings is used as an example, not as a particular restriction.
The difference seems to be about 40 people and their cars.