339 replies to this topic

[Beckys_Mom]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 10:41 PM, said:

If a person complained it must be an issue.

Absolutely... And if a complaint is made and  it is checked out  and seen for real, as law breaking, then the issue gets bigger.. And look  it sure did  

What makes it worse is people who do not pay attention and cannot look at it from both angles...  I have read some silly biased statements mentioned on the news articles  posted on line about this same story that  whine over  how it is so unfair, they are just singled out because they are Christian..I think any intelligent person can see that  it is not about singling anyone out..

.If that is the real case .. then every law breaker can use the same chant, and say-   I was only arrested because I was causally flogging hooky Jeans that accidentally fell off a back of a truck. I was doing a good deed thinking people could use these jeans.... I am singled out because I am a white half French and half  Irish man  how rude  lol ...It never washes  with a good judge though... Thank goodness

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 21 February 2012 - 10:58 PM.

[HerNibs]

Cassea, on 21 February 2012 - 10:46 PM, said:

If a person complained it must be an issue?  Nonsense. If a person complains about the black family next door bringing in their homeboys from the city.  Their motivation is racism.  They might turn it to "the music is too loud" "the parking spots"  etc.  None of the issues they say matter really are issues.   I'd have more respect if they said. "I paid to have a home far away from people. I don't like seeing so many people so close"  But honestly,  the complainer has a right to move.  They don't have a right to control company coming to visit at someone's home.

Really?

So the neighbor who complained about our JW neighbor and the increase in traffic did so because they were racist or anti-Christian?

The complainer isn't violating any ordinances.  

Nibs

[HerNibs]

Beckys_Mom, on 21 February 2012 - 10:50 PM, said:

Absolutely... And if a complaint is made and  it is checked out  and seen for real, as law breaking, then the issue gets bigger.. And look  it sure did  

What makes it worse is people who do not pay attention and cannot look at it from both angles...  I have read some silly biased statements on the news articles  posted on line about this same story that  whine over  how it is so unfair, they are just singled out because they are Christian..I think any intelligent person can see that  it is not about singling anyone out.. .If that is the real case .. then every law breaker can use the same chant  ...It never washes  with a good judge though... Thank goodness

Nibs

[Beckys_Mom]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

Really?

So the neighbor who complained about our JW neighbor and the increase in traffic did so because they were racist or anti-Christian?

Yup  lol    only joking..  Of course not...

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 21 February 2012 - 11:08 PM.

[Cassea]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

Really?

So the neighbor who complained about our JW neighbor and the increase in traffic did so because they were racist or anti-Christian?

The complainer isn't violating any ordinances.  

Nibs

What does your situation have to do with this one?  Entirely different home. Entirely different state.   Your situation applies to yours. It may well have affected the traffic in your state.

But as I asked,  please explain, if in this case it is true,  how is "parking" being effected.  That's in the quote you pasted. They have a huge parking spot behind their house.  So how is parking an issue?

[HerNibs]

Cassea, on 21 February 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

What does your situation have to do with this one?  Entirely different home. Entirely different state.   Your situation applies to yours. It may well have affected the traffic in your state.

But as I asked,  please explain, if in this case it is true,  how is "parking" being effected.  That's in the quote you pasted. They have a huge parking spot behind their house.  So how is parking an issue?

It's a similar situation in which a regular "religious" gathering cause a nuisance on our street.  CODE was enforces to stop the situation.

Now, regarding the situation with the Fromms, if I can find out exactly what the citation stated and which codes were violated I could tell you what the exact issue is.

But we don't have all the information.  Only very biased sites and one city attorney's statement.  If you can find any more information like - the codes violated and the nature of the violation, we are kind of stuck aren't we?

But at no point do I think this was "racist" or anti-christian in the action.  I think it's a cash strapped jurisdiction grasping at anything.

Nibs

[Beckys_Mom]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:

But at no point do I think this was "racist" or anti-christian in the action.  I think it's a cash strapped jurisdiction grasping at anything.

Nibs

Well said... Couldn't have put that any better myself

[Cassea]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 11:22 PM, said:

It's a similar situation in which a regular "religious" gathering cause a nuisance on our street.  CODE was enforces to stop the situation.

Now, regarding the situation with the Fromms, if I can find out exactly what the citation stated and which codes were violated I could tell you what the exact issue is.

But we don't have all the information.  Only very biased sites and one city attorney's statement.  If you can find any more information like - the codes violated and the nature of the violation, we are kind of stuck aren't we?

But at no point do I think this was "racist" or anti-christian in the action.  I think it's a cash strapped jurisdiction grasping at anything.

Nibs

The cash strapped district in California needs $500?   Really.   The code they used mentions that it should not be used for a Church. The code they used targets them for their religion.   So I'm sure that their religion had a lot to do with it.  Otherwise it would never have been mentioned.  But it was.  By the state.

[Ron Jeremy]

Cassea, on 21 February 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

The cash strapped district in California needs $500?   Really.   The code they used mentions that it should not be used for a Church. The code they used targets them for their religion.   So I'm sure that their religion had a lot to do with it.  Otherwise it would never have been mentioned.  But it was.  By the state.

Hey, there's no way a local government will persecute the biggest religion in America.

[rashore]

Just popping a line here..

Uh yeah, no **EDIT** sherlock CA is fining for every frigging penny they can. Send fine now, we can answer your questions later. That state is hunting like a pig after truffles for every penny is can get. Our business partner is in CA, you should hear him complain about it.

I don't think it's because these folks are Christian. I think that any group would get nailed. 50 pagans (or any other faith) gathering twice a week every week? Nailed. There's a way to weasel money out of the situation, I don't think the town really gives a rats poototie what religion it is.  

And as a side haha... Wouldn't it be funny if we found out the people that complained were Christian? That the people that made the laws and are enforcing them are Christian? Would that then be, if this situation is PURELY based on these folks being Christian.. Christian on Christian hate?

**Tone it down, Rashore.**

Edited by aquatus1, 22 February 2012 - 12:58 AM.

[preacherman76]

This is so funny. The city had no problem with what was going on. They didnt say it was unlawful for them to gather. They just wanted money. As though money would make whatever perceived problem, just disapear. So all this talk of traffic, and parking, noise, ect ect ect, is all BS.


This is the very foundation of the problems we have in this country. Its the US constitutions top priority to protect property rights. Until they infringe on the rights of others, they should be able to do what ever you want on your property.

[aquatus1]

rashore, on 22 February 2012 - 12:49 AM, said:

And as a side haha... Wouldn't it be funny if we found out the people that complained were Christian? That the people that made the laws and are enforcing them are Christian? Would that then be, if this situation is PURELY based on these folks being Christian.. Christian on Christian hate?

I've hit a bit of a dead-end with the easily available info (this just isn't an interesting enough case, apparently), but from what I have been able to surmise, the legal definition of the church and the laws regarding permits are indeed local county laws.

This means that they were voted into place by the local business people.  

Pretty much all the churches to which this law would apply are JudeoChristian in nature.

Basically...it is not unreasonable to assume that the laws and the legal definition of a church was proposed and supported by the legally operating JudeoChristian churches, who are obeying the laws and regulations of their county, and who want to be protected against the unfair competition of people doing exactly what they do, but demanding not to have to pay for business permits or obey zoning regulations because they are running it out of their specially modified homes.  Basically, legitimate, dues-paying Christian churches protecting themselves from non-legitimate, non-paying, Christian churches.

As Preacherman points out...no one else really cares.

Edited by aquatus1, 22 February 2012 - 01:09 AM.

[Michelle]

HerNibs, on 21 February 2012 - 10:41 PM, said:

If a person complained it must be an issue.

Where I grew up, in Georgia, the couple that lived next door was old ever since I was born and thirty years later.   They complained about everything when we had pool parties, which was on a regular basis with four kids in the family. The police would drive by the house numerous times and finally they would stop to tell us that there was a complaint. They would apologize, saying that they hadn't heard any excessive noise, but there was a complaint and they had to stop and say something.

We never toned it down, because it wasn't loud to begin with, and they never came back. I've often wondered what they told the old bat if she called them after that. I do know that her husband became very attentive to the yard work after our pool was put in.

Edited by Michelle, 22 February 2012 - 05:03 AM.

[Mr Walker]

aquatus1, on 20 February 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

Of course not.  I already mentioned it before: Legally, (in that part of California, anyway) a church is defined as a place designated for religious discussion with three or more people in regular attendance.



It is very strongly protected at the federal level.  So much so that the federal government is expressly forbidden by the very First Amendment to interfere with assembly.  

There are, however, no absolute rights, and there never have been.  At the state level, the county level, and oftentimes, even at the neighborhood level, there are local laws which are created by the locals, appropriately enough, to defend their own rights and interests.

People keep glossing over what seems to me to be a pretty damn important point:  These laws did not just materialize out of thin air.  These laws were not written by people way up on a hill in a comfy mansion with nothing better to do.  Local laws are promoted by locals, and voted on by locals.  This isn't about some vague, disembodied, "government" agency out to screw the little guy; This is about the little guy voting in laws to protect himself, his property, and his business, and expecting the government to back him up.



Well...yeah.  Doesn't Australia have hunting laws?



Usually, although in this case it is specifically about the permit that they were previously warned to get.  Basically, they got fined because they did not heed a warning that they need to get a permit to act as a church in location.



Never has been, probably never will be.  As I mentioned earlier, pretty much all the sites carrying this article with that insinuation tend to be religious in nature.  The news sites with the article make it pretty clear that the fine is a business matter, not a religious matter.



That is pretty much what this is.  There are some people, who could be described as having a bias or an agenda, who are promoting the idea that this is a religious issue.  They don't seem to wonder why the local churches are not joining in the protest.  The local churches which, incidentally, follow the local zoning laws and have all their permits.

I am sorry but i dont undrestand your lines of reasoning Or else we live in very difernt cultures In america, where state /local and fereral laws conflictesp in matters of religion, does not federal law overide the others or take precedence over them?
How is a church a business? Or more particularly, how is an assembly of worshippers in a private home a business? The fine still seems to be for not getting a permit for the permission to worship as a group in  a private residence.  Nothing ot do with business.

The law, as i read it in one post, did not seem to diferrentiate between a church building and a private residence where people met to pray on a regular basis. It actually seemed to say that the private residence "became " a church in the eyes of the law, via the activity being held there.

And yes we do have laws on hunting in australia but somehow the need to legislate against shooting and lassoing of our fish seems to have passed us by.

I am tempted to think this was originally a form of "joke" law Eg "Those darn fish are so big in texas that you have to lasso the durn things, and hog tie them, before you can wrassle them out of the water" .

Edited by Mr Walker, 22 February 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[eight bits]

I love all the municipal finance experts doing up San Juan Capistrano's balance sheet for us.

This is how it's done, if that's what needs doing:



>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFoLmfiktGM

A token fine was imposed, subject to waiver, to motivate the property owner to attend to the zoning problem. Same thing as in many jurisdictions, the police suspend the fine on a minor automobile equipment violation. The idea is to get you to fix the burned-out headlight, not to raise money.

Lest we get distracted, I'll close with witness against the big lie here. Home Bible study is legal in America. I renew my request that the OP contact a moderator to revise his subtitle so that he now tells the truth about my country, or at least stops lying about it, posting knowingly or intentionally false, inaccurate or misleading material, as his subtitle is on its face.