Posted on 02/02/2006 7:23:47 PM PST by xzins
You might be mistaken. Scouts acknowledge God.
>Curious, I don't see the letters ACLU anywhere in defense of the prayer meeting.
The ACLU wants to be seen as such defenders for purposes of PR, but they will always prefer any religios practice to simply be theoretical and not a absolute right that warrants recoginition in the public square. In other words, ACLU wants religion kept in dark basements and out of view.
You're nearly right.
I hear the girl scouts have gone secular feminist...
But in this case, even a rabbi holding a prayer meeting in his own house (I doubt there are many basements in Florida) out of view of the public was harrassed.
This is a bit of good news; I remember pinging out a couple of articles about this some months ago. Now the good guys won. Happy ending.
It's amazing what liberalism does to the mind, isn't it ? I mean, how wrong is this !? Who the heck are they to be believe they should dictate what someone can or cannot do in their own house !? Helllooo ? Unbelievable. But then again...
"You had to know we'd find and root out you and your vile practices, you dirty cellar Christian! And involving children, even; I ought to just shoot you where you stand!"
Can't remember what science fiction book that's from, or if the quote is even exact, but I read it back in the 60's.
"Dirty cellar Christian" is the exact phrase, though; kind of hard to forget.
This story reminds me of the secret masses people held in their homes in Soviet Occupied Poland.
Does this also apply during a bris?
Good grief! So, let's get this straight. An Afghani national can phone an American in Orange CO, discuss terror or killing Americans with a gang of islamonazis, we are not supposed to interfere or wiretap, according to Dimbulbcrats.
But, an American Jew holding a prayer meeting in his own home with fellow Americans can't discuss RELIGION?
These chabads have been popping up all over my area.
They are causing many problems with the neighbors and they are in very liberal towns in Massachusetts.
Many of the people that complained were Jewish and the homes were bought in affluent,single family zoned neighborhoods.
I've read through reports on this back to 2002. There's nothing missing.
This guy's friends coming over for prayer meeting was no different than another guy's friends coming over for Saturday football or Friday poker.
The court said it clearly: religion was singled out.
Apparently, if the county had said "More than 5 cars (or 8, or 10...) at any one residence violates zoning," then it would have been legal. That would have applied to anyone. But apparently, they realized as soon as they said something like that, that they would have had the entire neighborhood down their throats. Scout moms, soccer moms, poker dads, etc.
They singled out religion. Not only is that a violation of free exercise, but it also violates free speech, equal protection, and security in one's home.
See #33.
"Popping up all over the place" is exactly what religion does. You can't legislate targeting only religion.
They could have had a zoning regulation that prohibited numbers of cars, numbers of people, etc., but they didn't.
Wonder why the zoners didn't want to say: "Houses can accomodate no more than 12 people." That would have been equal treatment.
I'm sure some people's superbowl parties would bring equal
traffic in that 'hood. Are these also prohibited?
Bingo!
Many consider a living religion to involve their everyday life, their friends, their jobs, their activities.>>>>>>>>>
As Ol' Joe down at the sawmill sixty years ago might have said," well, iffen hit don't what the heck good is hit anyhow?"
Because the defendants weren't Muslims.
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.