Hogwash. He can't just "conduct his services elsewhere." It takes money. Money to buy property. Money to build. The first ammendment is guaranteed. If the zoning law is causing him not to be able to practice his religion, it is wrong.
As for the scale of people attending.. that is another issue. Safety, and other considerations would limit this concern... NOT ZONING. There is no case of zoning laws prior to the 20th century. Additionally, churches have always been in residential areas.
It used to be that a church was looked upon as a positive addition to a neighborhood, or section of town. With the new anti-God, anti-religion climate in this country, this is no longer the case.
Either we own our land or we don't. I gurantee you he could hold a drunken football party or bluehaired bridge club with the same amount of attendees every week and the county wouldn't say squat. I've seen it happen. I personally know a pastor that was told by the County he could NOT hold regularly scheduled prayer meetings in his home for 15-30 people. He was told he could meet for any other reason except religious, as it then became a "church".
I live in Florida (Indian River County). My view is as long as they are not on my property or making too much noise, etc. Then it is nobody's business what they do. It is HIS property.
I'm sick to death of these zoning NAZI's. They never can leave it at good common sense. They always go too far. The deed restriction wannabes can jump in the same lake.
Here's to the Florida I was born and raised in, and I hope the Jew wins...
- a 6th generation Cracker
That pretty well sums up my attitude on this issue as well, but this situation is different. The visitors have been parking on neighbors' lawns, sometimes damaging property in the process, and causing traffic and parking problems. This is a residential area, and if you live there, you don't expect these kind of problems on an ongoing basis (as many as ten times a week).
When I first read the article at the top of this thread, I was sympathetic to the rabbi, and thought the zoning board was wrong, but after doing some more research and finding the article that I linked to, I changed my mind.
"All we wanted to do is share my Saturday meals with friends," Konikov said.
The rabbi is misrepresenting his case. Here are some more quotes from the article:
As part of the county’s case against Konikov, Glassman cited three Web sites where Konikov has listed his home as a place of worship open to anyone interested in praying
“It’s not just small, occasional gatherings,” said Ted McDonald, who lives a few doors down from Konikov and is president of the Sand Lake Hills Homeowners Association. He said the rabbi sometimes hosts nearly a dozen meetings a week. On Wednesday, McDonald presented a petition with roughly 300 signatures of people opposed to Konikov’s violation of the county code.
“I think he’s making a big mistake,” Lunin said. It’s not about Jewish discrimination or even government discrimination against religions in general, he said. “It may well be an issue about people not liking traffic in their quiet neighborhoods, about people worrying about their kids having to dodge too much traffic,” Lunin said.
I don't care what he does on his own property and I don't think zoning laws should address that, but this is causing a serious impact on his neighbors that I think needs to be dealt with.