Posted on 09/19/2011 11:04:53 AM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
>>All I said was this is standard zoning. Standard zoning may be unconstitutional but this is nothing unusual.<<
We are hearing more and more about such unconstitutional abuse.
But if we get to the point where so-called conservatives roll over and “accept” it instead of standing up to it, (and some are openly advocating that here), and we actually begin defending the State against those who want to enjoy their liberty...
then we have turned a dangerous corner in the road and in are in worse shape than I imagined.
I'd like to know if this single neighbor complains about lawn mowers on Sunday morning.
If this happened to be Muslims gathering each week in those numbers I think comments here might be different.
I agree with others who say this has gone beyond a simple, small (read that few to say 8-10) people and is nearly a business and should be functioning as such.
Frankly on the scale indicated I wouldn’t care for it either and ESPECIALLY if they just happened to be from the ROP which could very well happen nowadays.
>>Lets say twice a week, 20-50 bikers were gathering for a club meeting at some guys house in your neighborhood.<<
Since that is not what happened, I say we ignore that straw man.
Is it any governments business where they meet?
“But theres no evidence here that these rules are unreasonable. “
In your estimation?
It seems to me that if you buy a home, and a piece of property, and you want to have regular visitors, that should be a reasonable use.
Also, where do you draw the line? Do you want to have to contact the authorities for any activity that goes beyond sitting in your living room watching TV?
>>I agree with others who say this has gone beyond a simple, small (read that few to say 8-10) people and is nearly a business and should be functioning as such.<<
In your mind, what specific number of people does it have to be in order for Government to regulate their “peaceful assembly” and right to exercise free speech?
Please be specific.
Glad we agree, they were in violation of the law and cited for it.
Meeting to read the Bible should be viewed as a BUSINESS?!
>>I agree with others who say this has gone beyond a simple, small (read that few to say 8-10) people and is nearly a business and should be functioning as such.<<
The statute does not regulate the NUMBER of people assembling.
It regulates WHAT THEY CAN SAY when they are assembled. They cannot DISCUSS the BIBLE without obtaining a permit.
Does that sound like what the founding fathers had in mind to you?
>>municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits religious, fraternal or non-profit organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit.<<
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).
For me, that would be entirely dependent on whether the proprietor kept a good stock of very-good to excellent condition used firearms in his inventory...
;-)
>>So you are thinking they cannot serve God without meeting in their home<<
No one said any such thing. That is the most idiotic straw man argument I’ve seen in a while.
Or 18 yr old Scotch!
Probably not an issue since its once a month not 8 - 10 times a month with upwards of 50 people.
“Is it any governments business where they meet?”
I would think the answer is obvious because they got fined.
I think you are asking “Should it be the government’s business?”
They should have wrapped their bibles with a cover making them look like a Koran and gone into the house wearing burqas and filthy night shirts.
You aren’t very good at this. Why don’t you ask an adult for help?
You’re the one making the straw man arguments.
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.
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.