The Constitution says they government cannot endorse one religion over any other, which is not the same as no religion at all.
"The Constitution says they government cannot endorse one religion over any other, which is not the same as no religion at all."
It also says it can't 'prohibit the free exercise thereof' either.
This is government interference which if forbidden by the Constitution.
Of course that doesn't matter to the 'nanny' staters and people out to 'get the church'.
OK, but why CAN'T the church just turn the volume down a little? They aren't being asked to stop.
I'm in favor of Church Bells, Muzzein, Harleys and Airplanes having the same local regulations regarding noise.
There is no separation of church and state in the constitution, but there sure is a "free exercise" clause, which, in my opinion, should be interpreted as broadly as the "establishment" clause (although I think the establishment clause is interpreted FAR too broadly).
Then there is Hamtrack MI, with loud noises coming from local religious establishments which call people to pray. No noise regulation there.
Are the ringing of church bells integral to the religious practices of this church's members? I would guess not.
And even if they are, noise regulations are applicable to everyone, even churches. Arguing your religious rights are being violated while you violate a law applicable to everyone regardless of religion is almost always a non-starter. So says the U.S. Supreme Court.
This one is pretty straightforward.
The local noise ordinance establishes a 55 db limit.
If the ordinance, or the associated regulations, contains a clause that specifies the distance, then it's a law of general application that applies to everybody, irrespective of whether they are churches, businesses, individuals, wolves howling at the zoo or what have you.
If the ordinance or the regs do not contain a distance feature, the law is too vague and can be challenged in court and beaten. Of course, then all the town has to do is to fix the ordinance by inserting a distance measure to go with the decibel limit.
There's no religious issue here, or any constitutional rights issue here at all, really, except maybe one. It's a pure state's rights issue. States and their municpal subdivisions have the general police power, and can pass noise restrictions.
I suppose the one POSSIBLE argument from a Constitutional level is that any sort of noise restriction is a restriction on free speech/free expression of religion.
But that's nutty, because it knows no natural limit.
Can Indians use hallucinogenic mudrugs because they say their religious ritual requires it? No. The general drug laws override those specific religious needs. Likewise with noise. Of course, trying to take away Catholics' communion wine during Prohibition would have brought Prohibition to a screeching halt a lot earlier, so there is a realism factor here as to what general laws of government can presume to alter ancient practices of great big religions.
Catholic Church bell carillions don't fall within that "ancient practice" practical exception. Particularly not electric bells in suburban residential neighborhoods.
I've never supported these stupid noise ordinances. If you want it completely silent, live in the country. Otherwise, stop complaining. The fact that we as a society are citing churches for being too loud is ludicrous.
Odd.
Muslims can broadcast THEIR calls over a regional loudspeaker.
Why not just broadcast the chime over the radio, a low power signal? Those who want to hear it, can tune in. Those who don't, won't!
It might be especially useful in silencing the demonic cries coming out from mosques, in the least.
I bet when a mosque moves in it's wailing 110 db 5 times a day evey day.
I can take or leave electronic church bells, but 3 times a day and then for every Sunday mass starting at 7:30 am sounds like a lot. And at a loud volume? Doesn't sound like a good neighbor to me.
Our local Catholic church (the only one with bells) chimes its "bells" at noon and 5. No different on Sunday. Plays seasonal songs.
Funny note: The Catholic college I went to (and work at now) got a bell thingy, (electronic) when I was a student. It "rang" at noon with the bell song whose name eludes me now, followed by 12 'gongs'. Well I had a micro-economics class in the building with this thing, actually located right below it. Class met from 11:30 - 12:20, so three days a week professor had to stop and we all hummed the bell song and gonged along with it. It was impossible to hear yourself think, let alone hear him lecture while it was "chiming". It didn't last past the first semester.
Really dumb. How fussy can people get?
Just wait until a mosque moves into the area and is blaring the call to prayer 5 times a day. Everyone will want the noise ordinance enforced then.
AlaaaaaaaaaaahuAkback!
I was mad at first, and then just sad because if this is the worst to happen to worshipers of Christ then ok, carry the cross. The sad part is all that money raised and spent on something unusable
No problems, put up some Minarets and convert to Islam and see
what happens.
For the record, I don't want to here Church bells when I'm asleep either.
ah but wasn't there a mosque in the NE that had recieved an exemption over the same issue.
I think that the church would have more luck looking into the fact that the church bells were probably ringing long before anyone even thought of passing a law restricting the volume, and possibly before a lot of those people ever bought houses in the area. It's should be like the law that we have in WA state, you can't complain about farm smells, if you build house near a preexisting farm.
But neither can people complain about airport noise if the airport was there first. It should be the same.