>>There is nothing in there that prohibits zoning, for one thing. And zoning is essentially based on use and traffic.<<
From the areticle: City officials in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. say Chuck and Stephanie Fromm are in violation of municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits “religious, fraternal or non-profit” organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit.
PERIOD.
No mention of size, traffic, etc. Blatantly unconstitutional.
“Then, out of the blue, your new neighbor, who bought the 2 acres next to you, starts holding daily religious services that draw 2,000 people.”
Very weak straw man argument. The article says there are between 20-50 who meet twice a week.
It also mentions that parking and noise were not at issue. So another straw man argument.
“Can you invoke zoning, or does your neighbor’s 1st amendment right trump you?”
Yes, the First Amendment does trump the unconstitutional law against Americans freely meeting in their own homes and practicing their religion.
And history bears it out. This EXACT SAME CRAP was tried 200 years ago, and specifically rejected. Do your homework, study your own country’s history.
That is the essence of America. Amazing that some don’t grasp that.
IIRC, there is another section of the code with definitions, and sizes.
-- Very weak straw man argument. --
The point of the nutty hypothetical was to see if you thought the 1st amendment always trums zoning. You say it does.
-- Do your homework, study your own country's history. --
Thanks for the friendly advice, Ears.
I always find these types of threads to be interesting, on the occasions when they are posted. Interesting because you typically get the same breakdown each time.
On one side, you have the folks who hide behind the “law and order” argument, you know, “tough luck, shoulda got a permit.” These generally tend to be made up of the irreligious, if not always or necessarily atheists, types who hear about home Bible studies and don’t like the idea because they’re afraid that “Bible thumpers” might use unrestricted freedom to tell them they shouldn’t look up porno on the internet or something. Throw in a heaping helping of the mainline Catholic/Protestant types who are already naturally suspicious of “unorganized/uncontrolled” religious freedom anywise.
On the other hand, you have the more genuine Christians who think that the government doesn’t have any business using the false front of “necessary” regulations to violate the 1st/14th amendments.
I speak to missionaries who go into China and Vietnam. Church is legal, as long as it is in a building licensed for Religion. These services are monitored by the government, and the worshipers are filmed going in and coming out.
Home churches are illegal, but that’s where the believers go.