Saturday, May 30, 2009

Inconsiderate or unconstitutional

My Christian spammers started sending this story to me this morning.  A San Diego pastor and his wife have been told to stop holding a weekly bible study in their home by the county government. On the surface, it seems wrong. But I do not agree with the religious zealot who feel their constitution rights were trampled upon. No, to me it’s a classic land rights issue. The local government would need a strong case to convince me their actions are legitimate.

I read the comment thread. It was hard to wade through for obvious reasons (like this).

California needs the cash because of their greedy habits, material obsessions and uncontrolled spending, etc. Why should the rest of us sacrifice our ways (bible studies) to bail you out. Learn to control your lavish lifestyles... maybe you need to join a Bible Study group to humble yourself.

- Spoken by the Christian in the split level 4,000 square foot home with a BMD in the drive way.

Digging through the comments I found the real story. Neighbors complained about the weekly prayer meetings with 15 or more people parking on a cul-de-sac. They’ve been holding the meeting for five years. As a cul-de-sac dweller myself, I can testify that the local house church packs them in on a regular basis and parking is a problem.  But he minds his business and I mind mine, so no worries. All I can conclude from my reading is that the title of my post should be changed to Inconsiderate and Unconstitutional.

Technorati tags: ,

Comments (5)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
If the people attending the bible study were interfering with the abilities of the residents of the cul-de-sac to park or get out of their driveways, then the government was well within it rights. If another resident had a large number of cars in the way, I figure the cops would be called also.

I would bet most of the people sending you this story even read the contents of it. They just saw that some bible group was told to stop in their own home. Those that did read about the parking probably said something like it is only for one hour so why should that be a problem. Of course if you were to block them in or make it hard on them by even a few minutes they would be all up in arms.
I've read the story on numerous sites and only one so far is a legitimate news site, that being one of the local news affiliates. Strangely their story seems to be lifted word-for-word from the "Christian news" sites which makes me wonder who wrote the thing (there's no byline). The whole story really sets off warning bells, particularly that line of questioning the state official allegedly put forth. What state official would really ask those questions of a citizen?

From what I've read not only was there a persistent problem with cars all over the place, but one neighbor possibly called in a complaint after his car was sideswiped by one of the Bible bangers (who apparently didn't have the decency to speak up about what s/he'd done). Furthermore as at least one of the stories indicates the Bible study often "spilled into the cul-de-sac" which means the neighbors would routinely be treated to at least 15 people making a ruckus in front of their homes. Who wants that every week?

These people obviously have a church. That building is being subsidized by our tax dollars and it's sitting empty during the week. Why can't they go there instead of being a bother to the neighborhood?
The only one that’s being quoted in this story, seems to be their Attorney, Dean Broyles: “the small Bible study, with an average of 15 people attending” I’d bet it’s more like, 15-20 adult’s, each with two to five kids in tow. And that shit probably went on, much longer than just one hour, and probably spilled outside as well. (It takes most Christians, more than just an hour, just to say their god-blesses, and their fair-well’s too each-other).

I wouldn’t want something like that going on next door to me!
It sounds like the issue is one of parking. Bringing religion into it doesn't even seen necessary.
1 reply · active 828 weeks ago
Nope - but now thte cat is out of the bag, there is not putting it back.

Post a new comment

Comments by