"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?
"A southern California family has been fined for holding regular Bible studies at their home because it violates a city zoning code, The Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday.
The city of San Juan Capistrano, in Orange County, fined Charles and Stephanie Fromm $300 for having as many as 50 people assembled at their home twice a week, the Times reported. City officials also warned the couple that subsequent fines could increase if they continued to host the Bible studies without obtaining a special permit.
A religious legal non-profit group, the Pacific Justice Institute (PJI), has taken up the case saying the fine was a violation of religious freedom.
A spokeswoman for the city of San Juan Capistrano stressed that local authorities were not trying to prohibit home Bible study.
Instead, she said the city fined the Fromms for transforming a residential area into a place where people regularly assemble.
"The Fromm case further involves regular meetings on Sunday mornings and Thursday afternoons with up to 50 persons, with impacts on the residential neighborhood on street access and parking," spokeswoman Cathy Salcedo said in an email to The Los Angeles Times.
Brad Dacus, an attorney for the Public Justice Institute, said the Fromms live in a semi-rural area and have not caused any parking problems for neighbors.
He said the Fromms should have their money returned, adding that PJI intends to defend "this family's home Bible study all the way to the US Supreme Court, if necessary."
Source
"Parking problems" are a very thin veil for a hatred of Christianity. This is California so the city officials could well be Leftists.
14 comments:
"fined the Fromms for transforming a residential area into a place where people regularly assemble"
So, this Mexifornia city has decided to abolish both the right to practice your religion (and) to peacefully assemble, and all in one day! Wow! Busy little commies, aren't they.
Here's hoping the Fromm's get themselves the most aggressive lawyer they can find, and take this city for every penny it has, or will have in the future.
"This is California so the city officials could well be Leftists."
Could be leftists? LOL!
And in case you didn't make the connection, this is the same town that went into a tizzy over the city councilman naming his dog "Mohammad" noted on this blog on September 23.
Well it's somewhat paranoid to say this was based on "hatred of Christianity" - it's just bureaucracy about use of residential property on a regular basis.
They are just too cheap to rent out a room at a church.
Anonymous 2:53 said...
"Well it's somewhat paranoid to say this was based on "hatred of Christianity" - it's just bureaucracy about use of residential property on a regular basis..."
So, can we expect to see them do this to, say, Jews or Muslims, anytime soon? I'm prefer paranoia to your complete detachment from reality.
I think it's probably appropriate to lay this charge as a bureaucracy problem responding in the usual unthinking manner to a poorly thought out local law.
Without evidence that there is a greater antipathy against the practicing of Christianity in that community the "lesser" charge of just plain stupidity is a more likely cause.
I would demand a copy of the relevant ordinances. If the traffic control is in there, the city has a point. If not, tell the city folks to either join the study or beat it.
It really is that simple.
I would demand a copy of the relevant ordinances. If the traffic control is in there, the city has a point.
The applicable code is 9-3.301 and can be found here:
http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=16607&stateID=5&statename=California
The issue is a note in the land use which says a residential zoned home cannot be used for "churches, temples, synagogues, monasteries, religious retreats, and other places of religious worship and other fraternal and community service organizations."
Parking is not an issue as the lot on which the family resides is quite large and people park on their private property.
The question is, what right does the government have to interfere with 1) religious freedom 2) freedom of speech and 3) the right to assemble?
The statute actually limits parents groups from meeting, group tutoring, etc.
The statute is broad, overreaching and most likely un-Constutional.
The intollrence of liberals what ever happened to FREEDOM of RELIGION and HOME PRIVACY? nothing to BIG BROTHER,BOOO BIG BROTHER
Anon 12:48, said,
"The issue is a note in the land use which says a residential zoned home cannot be used for "churches, temples, synagogues, monasteries, religious retreats, and other places of religious worship and other fraternal and community service organizations."
So just what is the definition of "place of religious worship"?
Prayer and singing are accepted as forms of worship. My home is a Christian home where my wife and I regularly pray and sing along with Christian music, so we are thus engaging in regular worship. Would we likewise be subject to such a code? What number denotes a "place of religious worship"?
And what about Muslims? They pray together regularly in their homes. Should they not be subject to the same codes?
7:30 AM - "complete detachment from reality" : ain't that somewhat hyperbolic for a comment that others seem to agree with?
I thought there was separation of state and church. Uncle Sambo has no right to fine them.
Those big city buricrats who poke their big noses into peoples private homes should all be removed from office and banned from america we dont need commie reptiles
Post a Comment