Get Your God out of my Nieghborhood

[Richard Brand]

If you will grant me a moment I would like to diverge from the normal blog topic of this forum, hosing policies in the U.S. and exegete on a different topic, though still about housing, it is more constitiutional in nature.

                In San Juan Capistrano, California, a couple has been fined $ 300 by the city for holding “Christian Bible study sessions” in their private home. (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/california-city-fines-couple-for-ho...) Not only have they been fined they are under the threat of an additional $500 fine per occurrence if they continue to hold said meetings in their home. I will agree I am in no way a legal scholar and don’t have completely firm understanding of the entire legal structure, yet, but I can’t help but wonder if these fines and the subsequent municipal code would pass constitutional muster. How is this not a violation the Free Exercise Clause in the First Amendment? Let’s look into this for a few moments.

                The Fromms, the couple whose actions are deemed illegal, are in violation of the city’s municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits gatherings of religious, fraternal, or nonprofit organizations within private residents. (http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?) There is a problem with this law. A long time ago, in an era that it seems most people have forgotten, there were these people who had a crazy idea that people should have religious freedom. These people left Europe, and came to this new blank slate of a land that later became known as America. The decedents of these idealists carried the prospect of freedom even further and developed a nation based solely around individual freedoms. In other words, the idea that I, as an American, am free to follow the path to happiness as I see fit, be that path vocational, philosophical, or God forbid even religiously. These founders of the new nation, or Founding Fathers,  knew that these freedoms would eventually be threatened by the propensity of government to grow entirely too large and would try to take these freedoms; so they created a wonderful document that lays out the framework of the American government called… the Constitution. In the very first amendment, is a list of personal freedoms that the government cannot impose on, among these rights is religious freedom for individuals and restriction for the government. Together the “Establishment Clause” and the “Free Exercise Clause” are fundamental foundation for religious freedoms in America, or at least they are supposed to be. (if you need a citation for this section please borrow an elementary school students history book.) The Establishment Clause forbids the government from “establishing” an official religion, whereas the Free Exercise Clause prohibits the government from interfering  with  citizens practicing their religion. This basic principle has been tested and redefined several times by the Supreme Court. In Braunfeld v. Brown 1961, Justice Warren refined the clause to prohibit the government   “to impede the observance of one or all religions or . . . to discriminate invidiously between religions . . . even though the burden may be characterized as being only indirect.” (http://supreme.justia.com) Couple that with the all inclusionary view of the Fourteenth Amendment, it equals a violation of the rights possessed by the Fromms. The municipal code clearly impedes their right to exercise religious practices in their homes.

                As we look into the idea of city planning, we have to decide what forms on restriction should be placed on our cities. Does the council have the right to place limits on what happens in an individuals private residence. If a citizen decides to grow earthworms for fishing in their garage and it idoes not affect his neighbors, should that be restricted? This is a tricky road to navigate. Obviously there are laws restricting live stock in residential neighborhoods for the good of the community. There are laws that govern the building standards of houses in communities. There are laws concerning businesses in private homes. All of these laws are understandable, because they all have a common theme. They violation of these laws affect others. The problem with the San Juan code is how does it affect others. Is it simply the idea that God might be taught in a neighborhood? Was the Fromms singing to loud, maybe late at night, or maybe they were having people park in a manner that impeded other motorists? If any of these reasons are the case for the complaint then yes fine them, but under the right offense. Not as a guise against the assembly of religion. As a city planner, the only tool you will possess is zoning. Use it carefully though. Trading tyranny at a federal level for tyranny at a local level is no compensation. Violation of personal rights from any level of government is still a violation of rights.

[Pamela Ann Cameron]

Great Rant Richard!  Zoning is a tool that can be used for good or evil.  Zoning, in this case, I believe tramples on citizens' constitutional rights.  I have had Bible studies in my home, and I cannot imagine being fined for them.  This municipal law is unconstitutional.  As you outlined above, if the Bible study is disruptive in some way, such as an unacceptable noise level or illegal parking problems, the city should deal with those as separate issues.  Ticket the illegal parkers and warn the residents about noise issues.  But fining them for a Bible study in their home is simply unconstitutional any way you look at it.  Unfortunately, the Fromms may not have the means to hire an attorney to fight the city on legal grounds.  In this case, I feel the local church community should rally and hire an attorney to fight this issue in the courts.  It is an incredible slippery slope that the City of San Juan is on.  I believe this case could ultimately be won on the grounds of freedom of religion and assembly.  These are the kinds of cases that Christians must be willing to take to court.  The Christian community must be pro-active in fighting for our constitutional rights in practicing our faith in our homes.  Personally, I believe the fight needs to begin on our knees and then proceed to the courts.  Tyranny over freedom will take as much ground as we let it have.  We have got to stand up for the Fromm's of this world!  Because the next city that passes this kind of law might be mine or yours...

[Richard Brand]

I spoke with a friend of mine who is in the ACLU and he tolsd me they were already talking about this case. Strange as it may sound they are the perfect people for filing the case.

Pamela Ann Cameron said:

Great Rant Richard!  Zoning is a tool that can be used for good or evil.  Zoning, in this case, I believe tramples on citizens' constitutional rights.  I have had Bible studies in my home, and I cannot imagine being fined for them.  This municipal law is unconstitutional.  As you outlined above, if the Bible study is disruptive in some way, such as an unacceptable noise level or illegal parking problems, the city should deal with those as separate issues.  Ticket the illegal parkers and warn the residents about noise issues.  But fining them for a Bible study in their home is simply unconstitutional any way you look at it.  Unfortunately, the Fromms may not have the means to hire an attorney to fight the city on legal grounds.  In this case, I feel the local church community should rally and hire an attorney to fight this issue in the courts.  It is an incredible slippery slope that the City of San Juan is on.  I believe this case could ultimately be won on the grounds of freedom of religion and assembly.  These are the kinds of cases that Christians must be willing to take to court.  The Christian community must be pro-active in fighting for our constitutional rights in practicing our faith in our homes.  Personally, I believe the fight needs to begin on our knees and then proceed to the courts.  Tyranny over freedom will take as much ground as we let it have.  We have got to stand up for the Fromm's of this world!  Because the next city that passes this kind of law might be mine or yours...

[Pamela Ann Cameron]

However strange it may sound, the ACLU would probably do a good job in fighting this case.  It is about loss of freedom, politics aside.  As crazy as this may sound, if it was a Koran study, we should be concerned about the Moslems being fined as well.  Religious freedom is religious freedom whether it is my religion or someones that I disagree with.

Richard Brand said:

I spoke with a friend of mine who is in the ACLU and he tolsd me they were already talking about this case. Strange as it may sound they are the perfect people for filing the case.

Pamela Ann Cameron said:

Great Rant Richard!  Zoning is a tool that can be used for good or evil.  Zoning, in this case, I believe tramples on citizens' constitutional rights.  I have had Bible studies in my home, and I cannot imagine being fined for them.  This municipal law is unconstitutional.  As you outlined above, if the Bible study is disruptive in some way, such as an unacceptable noise level or illegal parking problems, the city should deal with those as separate issues.  Ticket the illegal parkers and warn the residents about noise issues.  But fining them for a Bible study in their home is simply unconstitutional any way you look at it.  Unfortunately, the Fromms may not have the means to hire an attorney to fight the city on legal grounds.  In this case, I feel the local church community should rally and hire an attorney to fight this issue in the courts.  It is an incredible slippery slope that the City of San Juan is on.  I believe this case could ultimately be won on the grounds of freedom of religion and assembly.  These are the kinds of cases that Christians must be willing to take to court.  The Christian community must be pro-active in fighting for our constitutional rights in practicing our faith in our homes.  Personally, I believe the fight needs to begin on our knees and then proceed to the courts.  Tyranny over freedom will take as much ground as we let it have.  We have got to stand up for the Fromm's of this world!  Because the next city that passes this kind of law might be mine or yours...