Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Excuse Me, Ma'am, We've Had Reports of Prayer
San Diego County officials have threatened to fine a local pastor and his wife for holding unauthorized Bible study sessions in their home. The couple's attorney, Dean Broyles of the Western Center for Law & Policy, tells the story this way:
The county asked, "Do you have a regular meeting in your home?" She said, "Yes." "Do you say amen?" "Yes." "Do you pray?" "Yes." "Do you say praise the Lord?" "Yes."
Evidently that was enough to qualify the house as a house of worship, meaning the hosts need a "major use permit," which can cost tens of thousands of dollars to acquire. The Bible classes attract about 15 people a week.
Broyles, who is warning the county that its enforcement actions violate the First Amendment right to freedom of religion, also offers reasons for the secular to worry:
If the county thinks they can shut down groups of 10 or 15 Christians meeting in a home, what about people who meet regularly at home for poker night? What about people who meet for Tupperware parties? What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a regular basis and support the Chargers?
[Thanks to Tricky Vic for the tip.]
|5.28.09 @ 2:21PM|#
And this is exactly where Christians (like myself) need to put our efforts. Not on getting things INTO the schools, but getting the government OUT OF our lives. The only way to protect everyone's right to religion and expression is to keep it separated.
Never Fear, the Catholic Crusa|5.28.09 @ 2:23PM|#
Still reading the horrid news Mad Max donned his cape and costume. Steeling himself for the battle ahead he returned to the story, for he realized that in his haste to prepare to defend the Mother Church he had not yet found out if the victims of this great injustice were indeed Catholics in good standing...
Godvernment is good, Godvernme|5.28.09 @ 2:25PM|#
The only way to protect everyone's right to religion and
expression is to keep it separated.
The only right to religion you have is the obligation to worship
the state.
What part of being a good citizen do you not understand Morgan?
Godvernment is good, Godvernme|5.28.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Are the Chargers American League or National League?
Federal (Chrysler) League.
Govball, the new national passtime.
brother peachy|5.28.09 @ 2:29PM|#
I lived on a street where there was someone who was running some
kind of business (don't know what it was) out of his house. It was
residential. There were about 50 cars 'round the place all the
time. When friends visited they had to park about 3 or 4 blocks
away there were so many cars.
I guess someone ratted the guy out and he shut down the store or
moved it to an actual business place or whatever and the amount of
litter and parking went back to normal. He still lives there as far
as I know so I doubt that it was drugs.
Maybe the preacher wanted to get his house tax deducted as a house
of worship.
|5.28.09 @ 2:29PM|#
WTF, San Diego? For a town whose name means "A Whale's Vagina,"
you sure aren't very tolerant.
Seriously, 15 people in a house needs a permit? Hell, why does a
big old honkin' megachurch even need a permit?
Cal Lipigian|5.28.09 @ 2:31PM|#
Too bad Lefiti is not hear to hit us with a zinger that we all worship, wait for it, the Market. Oh, Snap!
Rimfax|5.28.09 @ 2:33PM|#
Sounds like an extra-bonus violation of the first amendment. Not only are they being told they must get a permit to have a modest gathering at their home, they are told that the fact that it is a religious gathering plays a part in that requirement. If the ACLU doesn't jump all over this, shame on them. I'm an atheist and I still find this exceptionally repugnant.
|5.28.09 @ 2:34PM|#
"what about people who meet regularly at home for poker
night?"
Um, the government already comes after those people. After all,
they are involved in the dread evil that is gambling! (Sigh.)
|5.28.09 @ 2:34PM|#
Seriously, 15 people in a house needs a permit?
What about a party?
It's gettin' hot in here (so hot)
So take off all your clothes
I am gettin' so hot, I wanna take my clothes off
|5.28.09 @ 2:35PM|#
I am gettin' so hot, I wanna take my clothes off
The worst part of any party you attend.
|5.28.09 @ 2:37PM|#
The worst part of any party you attend.
Prude.
If the ACLU doesn't jump all over this, shame on them. I'm an
atheist and I still find this exceptionally repugnant.
Seconded.
|5.28.09 @ 2:37PM|#
Right to peacefully assemble, right to free exercise of religion, right to freedom of speech. Violated.
|5.28.09 @ 2:39PM|#
My recollection is that the ACLU isn't as interested in free exercise cases as it is in Establishment Clause cases. Unless, of course, the free exercise involves peyote.
|5.28.09 @ 2:39PM|#
Broyles mistake came out right from the start.
The county asked, "Do you have a regular meeting in your home?"
She said, "Yes."
What she should have said was "Look, (insert beauracrat name), I
know you're just doing your job but I have nothing to say to you.
Don't come back without a warrant."
More and more I'm realizing that people should not answer any
questions posed by the state/county unless compelled by court order
or such.
Xeones|5.28.09 @ 2:42PM|#
There was a similar case in Virginia Beach a while back, with a bunch of Buddhist monks in a house. They came to some kind of settlement.
VM|5.28.09 @ 2:43PM|#
wtf. one of the best places for practice of religion! double
poop on San Diego.
darn tootin, they should be allowed to meet in recognition of their
faith! This conversation should never have to take place.
PROGLIB @2.37: right on!!!
Collect and Serve|5.28.09 @ 2:43PM|#
...what about people who meet regularly at home for poker
night?
If you have another report of an illegal activity in someone's
home, we suggest you file it now, unless you would prefer to
discuss it under enhanced interrogation techniques, sir.
What about people who meet for Tupperware parties?
The same goes for any reports of attempts to evade California state
sales taxes. We can bring in federal officers if necessary -- we've
done it before.
What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a
regular basis and support the Chargers?
Please contact the commissioners of major league baseball and the
National Football League to determine if you are violating the
terms of use of their broadcast by having too many people at your
home. I hope for your sake you're not pausing it on the TiVo to
watch replays, since they may qualify as rebroadcasting without
their express written consent. We will be in contact with the FCC
and the FBI as necessary.
Have a good day.
robc|5.28.09 @ 2:45PM|#
Xeones,
Huh. Buddhist monks suck. The proper settlement involved the city
giving the church a brazillion dollars for the civil rights
violation.
|5.28.09 @ 2:46PM|#
What about people who are meeting to watch baseball games on a regular basis and support the Chargers?
This does help explain the Chargers' record last season.
Kolohe|5.28.09 @ 2:47PM|#
In or out of context the county official's questions are pretty
damning and will likely put the county in an adverse position in
any legal proceedings.
But to be contrarian, if there are 10 cars every week that park on
the street outside his house (which was the proximate cause of the
county investigation due to a complaint from the neighbors after
one of the attendees hit another neighborhood car) there is a
content neutral public interest*
*nobody here likes zoning too much. I don't like zoning too much.
But there are likely nevertheless zoning restrictions wrt how many
cars are expected to be parked in the neighborhood at any given
time. It would take a better picture than the one provided by the
website to judge whether or not this family's activities actually
have an undue impact on the neighborhood and the public rights of
way.
Homer J Simpson|5.28.09 @ 2:47PM|#
See that ship over there? They're re-broadcasting Major League Baseball with implied oral consent, not express written consent-or so the legend goes.
T|5.28.09 @ 2:49PM|#
More and more I'm realizing that people should not answer
any questions posed by the state/county unless compelled by court
order or such.
Never let them in the house without a warrant.
Never answer any questions without a lawyer.
Anything else opens you up to arbitrary and capricious abuse.
Somewhere on Youtube is a law professor explaining why you should
never talk to the cops. Essential viewing for the modern
citizen.
brother peachy|5.28.09 @ 2:52PM|#
Actually, when I think about this a little more, I realize what
a great scam it is.
I think that I'll have 15 friends come over to my house every week.
We'll say a few prayers. I'll then file to say that my house is tax
exempt.
The guy is a genius.
Heywood Jabuzzoff|5.28.09 @ 3:00PM|#
More and more I'm realizing that people should not answer
any questions posed by the state/county unless compelled by court
order or such.
We have a nice cool cell waiting for you where you can rethink that
theory.
|5.28.09 @ 3:02PM|#
Kolohe,
The killer are the viewpoint/religious questions. The government
loses on that--it's a facially unconstitutional action.
However, if the issue had been you can't have eighty people living
in a one-bedroom apartment (accepting for the moment the various
zoning and health and safety regulations), then the fact that
they're a giant coven of witches is irrelevant, either way.
|5.28.09 @ 3:09PM|#
"Listen, I'm all for freedom of religion and stuff, but if those snakes get out one more time, I'm calling the Planning and Zoning Board!"
|5.28.09 @ 3:11PM|#
"Listen, I'm all for freedom of religion and stuff, but if
those snakes get out one more time, I'm calling the Planning and
Zoning Board!"
"I hate snakes, Jacques! I hate 'em!"
The Angry Optimist|5.28.09 @ 3:15PM|#
The killer are the viewpoint/religious questions. The government loses on that--it's a facially unconstitutional action.
That's not how I am reading it. How I'm reading it is that there
are a series of building that require a certain kind of permit. One
of those buildings is "house of worship". TO establish that this
was a house of worship, the lawmen asked the questions necessary to
arrive at the truth.
How else would you have the zoning people determine what is and is
not a house of worship?
Federal Dog|5.28.09 @ 3:16PM|#
"The only way to protect everyone's right to religion and
expression is to keep it separated."
No, the only way to protect everyone's right to religion and
expression is to shrink the government as much as humanly possible
as quickly as humanly possible. This is all about money and the
state doing whatever it think it can get away with to grab up
whatever it can.
catMozes|5.28.09 @ 3:19PM|#
Here's the don't talk to the cops link on Youtube.
"Mr. James Duane, a professor at Regent Law School and a former
defense attorney, tells you why you should never agree to be
interviewed by the police."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
|5.28.09 @ 3:19PM|#
I once asked an anti-theist the substantive difference between a
lecture and a sermon.
I got yelled at.
|5.28.09 @ 3:20PM|#
TAO,
It's invalid. How many other types of gatherings are not required
to have permits? Do you think they're all listed? If not, facially
invalid, because it discriminates on the basis of religion and on
viewpoint.
Kolohe|5.28.09 @ 3:22PM|#
@Pro Lib-
That's exactly what I was getting at.
@TAO-
At first blush, I wouldn't think you can go that far down that path
because of first amendment issues, but after thinking about it some
more, it probably happens pretty frequently but in reverse - i.e.
the 'house of worship' is trying to push their status because of
the tax exemption, with the govt pushing against it.
Mad Max|5.28.09 @ 3:22PM|#
'Still reading the horrid news Mad Max donned his cape and
costume. Steeling himself for the battle ahead he returned to the
story, for he realized that in his haste to prepare to defend the
Mother Church he had not yet found out if the victims of this great
injustice were indeed Catholics in good standing...'
Then, to his horror, Mad Max realized that he had actually defended
the rights of non-Christians to smoke marijuana for religious
reasons.
What penance should he do for defending non-Catholics? Max pondered
the issue, and then he decided that he needed a penance which truly
made him suffer. What was needed was a penance which would truly
inflict pain and anguish upon himself.
What about jumping into a pit of snakes? No, that wasn't painful
enough, and anyway Indiana Jones had already done it.
So Max decided that his best bet was to post comments on a
secularist blog and then read all the reply comments.
"You Catholics sure are masochists," said someone.
|5.28.09 @ 3:24PM|#
What about people who congregate in private homes to bitch about what a bunch of corrupt, lying douches the Planning and Zoning people are?
|5.28.09 @ 3:27PM|#
What if it had been a group of Republicans?
I would've told the bureaucrat this: "No, we're not a religion.
We're a cult."
|5.28.09 @ 3:29PM|#
Take this article with a huge grain of salt. It is my experience that no news report - broadcast or print - ever gets things 100% accurate. Couple this with the fact that there is NO government official on record, there is no other side presented. Color me very, very skeptical.
|5.28.09 @ 3:31PM|#
If a Buddhist monk sets himself on fire to protest government oppression, will the fire marshal write him a ticket for open burning without a permit?
Aaron Boyden|5.28.09 @ 3:44PM|#
I'm with Thomas, both on general news reliability grounds and on the grounds that Christians seem to love to tell crazy stories about how they're persecuted. Admittedly, government officials can be pretty amazingly stupid, but I'd still like to see some confirmation and elaboration of the details for this particular tale.
|5.28.09 @ 3:48PM|#
Hmmm. Jesus folk getting bent outta shape for peaceful gathering and prayer get themselves into a lather about freedoms of expression and gathering. I wonder if they would have the same argument for a home based swingers club on the same block.
|5.28.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Assuming that neighbor complaints drove this heavy-handed
interference of the local officials - 10 cars on the street once a
week? Get over it neighbors. What a bunch of whiny fuckin'
crybabies.
Add me to the list of atheists that sees this whole thing as
fucking outrageous. Local petty tyranny is the best face
you could put on it.
Cactus|5.28.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Christians should be thankful for the oppression. Christianity thrives when it is oppressed by the state and the mob.
|5.28.09 @ 3:56PM|#
Hmmm. Jesus folk getting bent outta shape for peaceful
gathering and prayer get themselves into a lather about freedoms of
expression and gathering. I wonder if they would have the same
argument for a home based swingers club on the same
block.
Can't speak for the theists. I'd still be pissed with the same
criticisms of both the offendsed neighbors and the city (county?)
oficials.
I am an equal opportunity righteous asshole.
|5.28.09 @ 4:00PM|#
10 cars on the street once a week?
I hear people bitching about legally registered cars parked on
public streets "too long" or "in the wrong place" all the time.
It's fucking amazing. I can't decide if it's funny or
terrifying.
|5.28.09 @ 4:02PM|#
I live on a private road. If somebody leaves their car on my property, I tell 'em to get it the fuck out of there, or I'll have it crushed.
Paul|5.28.09 @ 4:04PM|#
Once again, the question that rises in my mind: who turned them
in?
I doubt the county was parked in front of their home on a
surveillance gig for three months, making a case. Someone has to
call. And it's always a fucking busy body neighbor. I've said it
before, I'll say it again, the rules aren't there for the rulers to
catch us, the rules are their for disgruntled neighbors to leverage
against us.
Paul|5.28.09 @ 4:04PM|#
I live on a private road. If somebody leaves their car on my
property, I tell 'em to get it the fuck out of there, or I'll have
it crushed.
It was you, then, wasn't it P Brooks?
Kolohe|5.28.09 @ 4:12PM|#
Once again, the question that rises in my mind: who turned
them in?
One of the other articles on the linked website has this:
Jones said a visitor to a neighbor's house called the County after a Bible study member hit the visitor's car while leaving.
http://www.10news.com/news/19585458/detail.html
|5.28.09 @ 4:12PM|#
"""Right to peacefully assemble, right to free exercise of
religion, right to freedom of speech. Violated."""
But all those can be regulated, right? Sadly.
Think Heller, lots of regulations does not equal
infringement.
I do think is BS, but America is becoming more and more BS. But
what can you do, that's effective?
|5.28.09 @ 4:14PM|#
Gather in houses in groups of fifteen or more and discuss the overthrow of your local government?
|5.28.09 @ 4:17PM|#
"""Gather in houses in groups of fifteen or more and discuss the
overthrow of your local government?"""
Yeah, and if you come up with a plan it better be a good one.
Congress would be allowed to suspend Habeas, and the last attempt
didn't turn out to well for the southern states.
JB|5.28.09 @ 4:18PM|#
It's long past time for a revolution.
If you work for or with the government, you are the enemy.
|5.28.09 @ 4:18PM|#
I'd bet the county wouldn't have a problem if the people in the house was working on someone's re-election.
|5.28.09 @ 4:22PM|#
Well, I wasn't thinking civil war so much as the overthrow of the San Diego government. Maybe a few small rebellions would be good for our constitution. And our Constitution.
|5.28.09 @ 4:27PM|#
Man, the Chargers just need some help in the bullpen and they'll be all set this year.
|5.28.09 @ 4:39PM|#
"""Well, I wasn't thinking civil war so much as the overthrow of
the San Diego government. Maybe a few small rebellions would be
good for our constitution. And our Constitution."""
lol, CA probably doesn't have an insurrection clause. As long as
you avoid the feds commerce clause, it might be ok. ;-).
I think it would be good for our constitution.
|5.28.09 @ 4:41PM|#
Okay, so these people can revolt against the San Diego government, so long as they don't do any illegal drugs or practice any religion.
Mad Max|5.28.09 @ 4:48PM|#
'Christians should be thankful for the oppression. Christianity
thrives when it is oppressed by the state and the mob.'
The Libertarian Party might want to look into that.
Fluffy|5.28.09 @ 5:26PM|#
Take this article with a huge grain of salt. It is my
experience that no news report - broadcast or print - ever gets
things 100% accurate. Couple this with the fact that there is NO
government official on record, there is no other side presented.
Color me very, very skeptical.
I understand what you're saying, but there's really very little to
be skeptical about.
The most charitable possible reading of San Diego's action is
summarized in Kolohe's post. And since none of that impresses me,
we're left back at the original story.
"No no no, we're not oppressing religion, we're just exercising a
power we do not legitimately possess anyway," is not really an
effective counterargument to me.
|5.28.09 @ 6:01PM|#
"No no no, we're not oppressing religion, we're just
exercising a power we do not legitimately possess anyway," is not
really an effective counterargument to me.
This is why you are not being considered for a spot on the Supreme
Court.
Fluffy|5.28.09 @ 6:39PM|#
wait, what? Zoning powers don't exist?
I said they don't legitimately exist.
The SCOTUS casings backing these practices up are fucking
abortions.
Here are a couple of clues that they're illegitimate:
1. This case. "Hi, I have a few questions before I violate your
First and Fifth Amendment rights. Oh, but we're doing it to
preserve peace and quiet in areas we've arbitrarily labelled
'residential', so we're not actually violating those rights at
all."
2. The fact that virtually every SCOTUS decision on zoning has
relied on "balancing" of "state interests" with enumerated rights.
I don't know of any case that engages in such balancing that isn't
a naked power grab by the state. Essentially the courts invented a
doctrine that says, "Yes, we know certain rights have been
enumerated, but it annoys us that those rights get in the way of
some state end we want to see accomplished, so we're just going to
make shit up and pretend it's OK to violate rights if we think we
have a good reason." And they did so openly.
Umar|5.28.09 @ 7:17PM|#
As a Muslim, I am outraged by this illegal action against the pastor which threatens people of all faiths. I call for the arrest, trial, conviction and imprisonment of all officials involved in executing this travesty.
ed|5.28.09 @ 7:17PM|#
If only our religious people would start blowing
themselves up for a cause.
Knock knock.
Who's there?
The police.
Come on in. Praise Jesus.
Ka-BOOM!
perilisk|5.28.09 @ 8:06PM|#
"If you work for or with the government, you are the
enemy."
Those loyalist bastards in the fire department will never know what
hit them!
|5.28.09 @ 9:19PM|#
The county asked, "Do you have a regular meeting in your
home?"
The correct answer to such an inquiry is "fuck you, get a
warrant."
-jcr
|5.28.09 @ 9:22PM|#
substantive difference between a lecture and a
sermon.
A sermon is a kind of lecture.
-jcr
|5.28.09 @ 9:30PM|#
""""Evidently that was enough to qualify the house as a house of
worship, meaning the hosts need a "major use permit," which can
cost tens of thousands of dollars to acquire.""""
Ok, so they want to call it a house of worship. He's save thousands
on his new tax free status. ;-)
JB|5.28.09 @ 10:15PM|#
That inlcudes republicans and all the troopsies.
Did I say otherwise? Some are just bigger enemies than others.
There will come a time when people will have to decide what side
they are on. That time is getting closer and closer.
BruceM|5.28.09 @ 10:26PM|#
If it's against the deed/zoning restrictions, then tough shit. I
wouldn't want to live next door to a "house of worship" - by
definition you have crazy people congregating there, encouraging
the further development of each other's mental disorders and
auditory/visual hallucinations.
Instead of "Bible study" replace it with "Koran study" and these
same people whining about this law being unfair would suddenly have
no problem with it.
Apparently a poker game or gathering to have a barbeque or watch a
baseball game or celebrate a birthday or have a wake or open house
does not require some sort of license or is not against the deed
and/or zoning restrictions.
The bottom line is that we shouldn't be encouraging religious
people to gather together and egg on each other's "beliefs" - it's
asking for trouble. The only difference between a
"religious study group" and "terrorist cell" is the passage of
time. The only good part about this is that we known where
they are so we can keep an eye on them. Of course, it's likely that
nobody does, since religion is oh so peaceful and
precious....
(...and when they do inevitably cause another faith-based terrorist
attack, the survivors and victims and gawking spectators will pray
and quote religious texts, in an amazing display of how deadly and
contagious the religion disease truly is).
I should also note that for people who are inclined to say there is
a difference between Muslims and Christians vis a vis being prone
to domestic terrorism, normally I would agree. Islam is, all else
equal, far more dangerous than Christianity. However, the
Republican-Christian Party (formerly the GOP) desperately wants a
terrorist attack to occur on American soil. They crave it, they
pray for it, and they wait for it every day since Obama took
office, as they know blaming the next 9-11 on Obama is their only
real chance of being able to scare the voters into putting them
back into power ("See, the Democrats allowed this terrorist attack!
We told you, only we can protect the American people from
terrorists [well, except that one time]..."). Where there are
Christian "Bible Study" groups, there are Republican-Christians,
and they may get tired of waiting for Islamic terrorists to slip
one by the FBI/CIA/NSA/etc and may take matters into their own
faith-based hands, you know, to protect the children and American
way of life from Obama, a small tax hike, and european socialism.
Surely in their minds, a few thousand dead americans is a small
sacrifice to get rid of their arch enemy, the Commie-Nigger, whom
they all despise so much.
So, if there are going to be Bible Study groups or any other such
religious discussion group, they should be conducted in open, in a
know, public Church, where it can be easily monitored. The right to
privacy doesn't cover th right to religious expression. And we're
at war against faith-based terrorism, so all religious people are
potential enemies.
|5.28.09 @ 11:36PM|#
BruceM | May 28, 2009, 10:26pm | #
The bottom line is that we shouldn't be encouraging religious people to gather together and egg on each other's "beliefs" - it's asking for trouble. The only difference between a "religious study group" and "terrorist cell" is the passage of time.
As an atheist responding to this, I would like to say GOD DAMN YOU
TO HELL. I have many Christian, Muslim, Bahai, and Jewish friends.
None of them have done me any wrong, NEITHER YOU NOR I HAVE ANY
FUCKING RIGHT TO INTERFERE WITH THEM.
(Apologies to the decent people present for the screaming
caps.)
|5.29.09 @ 12:50AM|#
Aside from enforcing existing contracts and zoning restrictions
I'm not saying we should "interfere" with them. I'm saying we
should keep an eye on them.
And there's a difference between someone who calls themselves
"christian" or "jewish" (or whatever other religion" who goes to
services once or twice a year, and the type of people who gather at
someone's house for religious study groups. I have plenty of
friends who consider themselves to be Christians, Jews, etc, but
they don't go gather at some "Bible study" or "Torah study"
meetings at some guy's house. They go to synagogue on Yom Kuppur
and church on Easter.
If they were really truly religious people they wouldn't be friends
with you, an atheist (I assume you don't lie about being a
religious person).
Religion is a dangerous mental disorder and I refuse to "respect"
it because that's what political correctness demands. It's only a
matter of time before a faith-based terrorist unclasps his hands
from prayer and gets them wrapped around a nuclear or biological
weapon. They all have their doomsday prophecies that they
masturbate to, waiting for "this life" to end so they can go hang
out in paradise with their imaginary friends in the "next life" and
are more than willing to kill millions of people to act as a
servant of god when they get tired of waiting for "the rapture" to
come. And it all starts at some innocent-sounding "religious
prayer/study group" at someone's house.
There is nothing innocent about religion. There never has been all
throughout history, and there never will be. You people need to
figure out that religion has declared war on us, and it will
eventually kill all mankind. Instead of yelling at people like me
who point this out, we should be trying to find a cure for
religion. It's a clearly discernable genetic mental disorder. In
fact, the same gene that controls skin pigmentation (melanin
content) controls the part of the brain that causes religiosity
(that's why on average, there is a direct correlation between
darker skin and being more "spiritual," more prone to allowing
religion to dominate their lives. Black atheists are almost
nonexistant, while nearly all atheists are white. It has nothing to
do with intelligence or culture, it's entirely genetic (so don't
call me a racist). As such, I have sincere hope that maybe religion
can be cured. Or at least prevented.
But assholes like you would scream "that's mean" and "that's
politically incorrect" as if people should be allowed to roam the
streets in a violent, euphoric, delusional, manic state of mind,
unable to think rationally and answering visual and auditory
hallucinations, thinking that they have a direct, loving two-way
relationship with the omniscient creator of the universe who cares
about the most trivial facets of their life. Some of them who talk
about their god-hallucinations too much DO, in fact, get locked up
in mental hospitals. But the ones who can keep their mouths shut,
or only talk about it at Church/Synagogue/Mosque among the other
similarly ill people... well, they don't get put away in a safe
place, and they're the ones who crash airplanes into buildings. All
because of a genetic mental disorder nobody - not even those
naturally immune to it - have a desire to cure!
And have you even thought to yourself - why do they have the need
to meet beyond official religious gatherings at church? For what
purpose do they need to get together to "study"? Do you go to
atheist study groups? I don't, nor do I have any compulsion to go
to someone's home to discuss the writings of some atheist. Any
religious questions they have they can ask at church or look up on
google. These 15-people religious study groups are not innocent
book clubs. They're the seeds of terrorist cells. And I will not
apologize for pointing it out.
Bottom line - there's a difference between tolerating something and
encouraging it. Don't confuse the two.
Umar|5.29.09 @ 1:37AM|#
Also sprach BruceM:
"we should be trying to find a cure for religion. It's a clearly
discernable genetic mental disorder. In fact, the same gene that
controls skin pigmentation (melanin content) controls the part of
the brain that causes religiosity (that's why on average, there is
a direct correlation between darker skin and being more
"spiritual," more prone to allowing religion to dominate their
lives. Black atheists are almost nonexistant, while nearly all
atheists are white. It has nothing to do with intelligence or
culture, it's entirely genetic (so don't call me a racist)."
===
Yeah, BrianM, you're a racist. And you give other mental defectives
a bad rep. Click on the link at my name above to visit the url to
get the help you so desperately need and for which you are crying
out.
|5.29.09 @ 6:35AM|#
By your logic it's racist to say black people are more likely to
have curly hair than white people?
I'm not saying those with darker skin are in any way lesser people
or inferior. I'm saying religiosity as a whole is bad, the skin
color of the people being religious has nothing to do with it. I
merely point out the correlation as some evidence that religiosity
is genetic. But anytime anyone suggests any innate difference
between the races (even hair type) morons will automatically howl
racism and throw dung.
I don't expect most people to agree with me, I just want to be on
record as having said it so I can continue to point out that I've
been right all along. And I don't expect anyone to cure themselves
of religion due to anything I say, either.
But it pisses me off when people sit around talking as if religious
behavior should be encouraged. It should be discouraged to
the extent legally possible. And if enforcing a pre-existing zoning
restriction will do that, then good luck to the state (probably the
first time I've ever said that).
But the arguments I'm making will be made much more loudly and
vocally, and ultimately more effectively, by Christians once some
Muslims want to turn their home into a mini-Mosque. Then you'll see
how to properly initiate process and make politically correct
arguments to shut down a home "prayer group." And nobody but the
Muslims will think anything less about them.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 7:15AM|#
BruceM has set a new record for the most ridiculous
anti-religion posts on H&R. And that's saying something. When
you get some of the strongly anti-religious folks here saying
BruceM has gone too far, you know you've found the extreme.
For BruceM, apparently, the only acceptable religion is a social
club, and boy do we need to watch them darkies and A-rabs, cause
that melanin sure makes 'em feverish around bombs and
religion.
BruceM, surely you're aware most people reading you think you
insane. Hell, it's probably a badge of honor for you. If you're not
insane, please cite a source for your melanin = religion bit that
doesn't come from the fever swamps of xeroxed newsletters
circulated by folks the John Birchers think are too extreme.
And have you even thought to yourself - why do they have the need to meet beyond official religious gatherings at church? For what purpose do they need to get together to "study"? Do you go to atheist study groups? I don't, nor do I have any compulsion to go to someone's home to discuss the writings of some atheist. Any religious questions they have they can ask at church or look up on google.
Maybe because the find it useful, something like students at a
university getting together to cram for a test? Maybe because they
like to company of hanging out with each other? Maybe because they
think what they are studying is important and that they can offer
personal insight to each other that they couldn't offer if, I don't
know, they didn't meet? Just because you don't have an impulse
doesn't mean that others don't. Or are you self absorbed that you
really believe that others who see things differently are simply
wrong?
These 15-people religious study groups are not innocent book clubs. They're the seeds of terrorist cells. And I will not apologize for pointing it out.
This is the most laughably stupid comment I've seen on H&R for
some time. If you're right, why aren't we awash in domestic
religious terrorism? After all, these "seeds" were planted in the
Americas at least as far back as the 1600s. Or are they just the
slow germinating variety?
Frankly, the person who most scares me with what seems a ready
propensity for violence that could turn into terrorism is you, not
some folks who want to read the Bible together. You've already
shown yourself comfortable with using state force to suppress
religion (under the guise of zoning ordinances), so what about just
a little more force like, I don't know, rounding up all the
religious people in ghettos and making them leave the pure,
enlightened (for you, that probably refers to skin color) atheists
alone? There is more potential for violence in your statements and
desires than anything I've seen come from home Bible study
group.
-UM
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 7:19AM|#
mark, great link. BruceM should read it, but he'd just conclude that the Chinese government got it right and wonder why the hid the fact that the Chinese Christians are all a bunch a nigras... (Somehow they must be, right?)
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 7:21AM|#
BruceM is the kind of atheist who makes atheists reconsider their positions and think that maybe the fundies are rational...
|5.29.09 @ 8:28AM|#
BruceM is the kind of atheist who makes atheists reconsider
their positions and think that maybe the fundies are
rational...
No he isn't. Fundies are not rational. But I respect their right to
be irrational, with the constant caveat that they can't force any
of what they believe on me.
BruceM is an anti-theist, which holds the same tenuous relationship
with atheism that Randism holds with the dominant form of
libertarianism on this board. That is to say: yes they are related,
but not synonymous and not inter-responsible for each others
extremes.
That's not to say that I don't criticize religions and the people
that follow them, especially when they try and impose themselves on
me or attack the boundaries that rationality puts up between the
religious and secular worlds, but I support live and let live.
Anti-theists do not.
Although, I will say this in anti-theism's defense: No one comes to
anti-theism through rationality, it is a violent reaction to the
shattering of strong religious beliefs. Anti-theism is an
auto-immune disorder brought on by religious fervor, not an extreme
form of atheism.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 8:42AM|#
SugerFree, you are of course correct. There are a number of
anti-theists on H&R, though, and most of them would, I think,
find BruceM extreme.
(I should note that many H&R commenters commit the mirror
fallacy of what you pointed out in my comment: They conflate
militant fundamentalism with religion.)
I do think that, by comparison to BruceM, the fundies are pretty
rational. Most of them want to "save" you but aren't going to try
to force you to join them (they are sorry that you won't and feel
that you're making the wrong choice). Certain stripes of them like
having political power, but many are actually opposed to it as
well. Some of them are even strongly in favor of separation of
church and state because they realize the potential of for the
state to be used against them. I may disagree with them on points,
but I can talk to them. BruceM, on the other hand, will brook no
opposition or disagreement.
(I'm no fan of fundies, but agree with you about them in general. I
don't even mind if they try to proselyte to me because, if they
really believe that I'm going to hell for not subscribing to their
brand of Christianity, I would expect them to at least try to give
me an opportunity to avoid an eternity of misery. As long as they
respect that I have the right to choose that eternity of misery,
I'm fine.)
The anti-theist position of BruceM, however, does scare me, because
in the views he articulated, the force of the state should be
actively used to harass religion and discourage religious
folks.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 8:52AM|#
By the way, if you accept the fundies' premises about the nature of the universe, their behavior is actually pretty rational and understandable. If you don't accept those premises, it is not. But the thinking isn't fundamentally bad. You could argue it's misguided, but it's not that they don't know how to think. Since neither side is provable (and reason breaks down for answering questions like "Why is there something rather than nothing?"), I think both sides should have a little more tolerance for the other rather than acting like the other side consists of a bunch of mouth-breathing idiots.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 9:24AM|#
Wow. I looked up this melanin-religion bit on Google and found that it really is out there in the fever swamps. It's cited by black power sites (like this one) and gets attacked on white supremacist sites (like this one). BruceM has done the interesting mental gymnastics of taking thoroughly debunked pseudo-science, taking it as a given, and reversing the value placed on the interpretation. I'll give him points for creativity in using pure and utter BS to "explain" religion, but he won't be able to cite a single credible source for what he's arguing, because there is none.
|5.29.09 @ 10:01AM|#
TO: All
RE: Heh
It's not like we REAL christians haven't seen this coming.
As I like to say, "Welcome to the Great Apostasy." Early
stages.
And, it will get continually worse. But no matter how bad it
gets-and it's going to get VERY BAD-because we were warned about it
by Him, almost 2000 years ago, we've confidence in the final out
come.
After all....
.....we're read the end of the Book.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[What can separate us?]
|5.29.09 @ 10:49AM|#
If these same 15 people were gathering weekly to plan a campaign
for their local whales, trees, or liberal candidate I'm pretty
certain they wouldn't need a permit to do so.
Or, if they were gathering every week to watch a sports event on
the pastor's wide screen TV, eat some veggie burgers and throw back
a few organically brewed beers there'd no permit or fees required,
either, I'll bet.
So it doesn't get much more obvious than this: this group's First
Amendment rights are being violated. Probably a few other rights,
too. But I doubt any SoCal attorney is going to rush forward to
represent them.
Where do we send our contributions for their defense or their
fines?
|5.29.09 @ 10:55AM|#
Heh. I dare BruceM to head down to his local mosque and spout off his tolerant and well-reasoned opinions there.
|5.29.09 @ 11:18AM|#
I don't think the Chargers have 15 regular viewers.
So the question is- is this a religious persecution or a simple
government shakedown? Or both? Ahhh, Change.
|5.29.09 @ 11:30AM|#
Don't forget about people meeting to complain about the local
government and plan a course of action: like deciding it's time for
a new mayor. Or coming up with plans to participate in local
issues.
You know one of the reasons I ended up becoming an athiest is the
writings of Richard Dawkins, but even he is at total ass. I've read
an interview with him and a few other prominent athiests in Wired
where he says (paraphrased) "parents shouldn't teach their kids
religion. I don't want to intrude on the rights of people to raise
their kids how they want, but we need to start thinking about
drawing lines somewhere"
You don't need religion to think it's ok to try to control others'
lives and limit human freedom.
|5.29.09 @ 11:35AM|#
Book clubs will be next. You are reading and discussing Liberal Fascism/Atlas Shrugged/The Road to Serfdom/The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? That makes this a political organization affiliated with the GOP and subject to campaign finance laws. Either shut down or apply for official sanction and pay for the proper licenses.
|5.29.09 @ 11:36AM|#
I don't have a problem with a group of people meeting at the home of a friend for some occasion, whatever the purpose, but if someone is operating a church out of their home on a regular basis in a residential area, I got a problem with that. I think I've got the right to peace and quiet in my home, and I don't think I need to be listening to the coming and going of 15 to 20 people who visit my neighborhood simultaneously once more times a week. The obvious on street parking is another hassle. What if I want to have a couple of friends visit? Your rights end at the beginning of mine.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 11:56AM|#
I don't have a problem with a group of people meeting at the home of a friend for some occasion, whatever the purpose, but if someone is operating a church out of their home on a regular basis in a residential area, I got a problem with that.
Where do you draw the line? Having 15 people over once a week in a
place where you live full time isn't exactly operating a church.
Part of the problem here is that it was obvious that the specific
question was whether they were using it for a religious purpose,
rather than, say, hanging out barbecuing, discussing books, or even
running a (free) swingers' club, which would cause an equal
annoyance to the neighbors. Thus religious expression was singled
out for a restriction that a book club wouldn't have. Had they
answered that they just had weekly canasta parties there would have
been no citation for "unlawful use of property."
It's not clear that "peace and quiet" was the issue at hand. Yes,
there was damage to a car, but that's something for the vehicle
owners and their insurance to settle, not to shut them down
over.
I should nod to the libertarian argument that part of the problem
is that there is no clear ownership of the road, so there was a
negative externality from the Bible study group's parking issues.
Because no one owns it, there is no reason to not use it. It
reminds me of when I lived two blocks away from a university
football stadium after I got married. If the Bible study group got
shut down for their bit, the university should have had to cancel
football games because of the hassle they caused me: cars parking
in my driveway on occasion (I never had to have one towed), hours
of delay driving in my neighborhood, noisy people, etc. If a
15-member study group should have to pay tens of thousands of
dollars in usage fees just to meet in their pastor's home, what
does that say about the real negative externality of the college
football game?
|5.29.09 @ 12:00PM|#
And you give other mental defectives a bad rep.
Actually, I think Lonewacko, JB 'n 'em look better by comparison.
|5.29.09 @ 12:00PM|#
So, am I breaking the law when I and other members of my synagogue attend a shiva minyan?
The Monster|5.29.09 @ 12:16PM|#
Since the Chargers were mentioned....
A San Diego elementary school teacher, on the first day of class,
asked all the Chargers fans in the class to raise their hands.
Everyone raised a hand, except for Mary. The teacher asked why she
wasn't a Chargers fan.
Mary said, "Well, my parents are from Kansas City, so I'm a Chiefs
fan". The teacher responded, "So, if your mother were a crack
whore, and your father were her pimp and pusher, what would THAT
make you?"
Mary replied uncertainly "Um... A Raiders fan?"
|5.29.09 @ 12:31PM|#
TO: All
RE: Easy Peasy, Hypocrite
"I don't have a problem with a group of people meeting at the home
of a friend for some occasion, whatever the purpose, but if someone
is operating a church out of their home on a regular basis in a
residential area, I got a problem with that. I think I've got the
right to peace and quiet in my home." -- Easy Peasy
I guess they don't have any city ordinances about disturbing the
peace where this character lives. Or they don't have parking
ordinances either.
So, his/her problem boils down to thost godless
Bible-Thumpers.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Where there is no religion, hypocrisy becomes good taste.]
|5.29.09 @ 12:51PM|#
I wonder if they would have let them alone if the pastor they were from a gay church.
|5.29.09 @ 1:01PM|#
First of all, everyone's HOME IS THEIR CASTLE. It's the
law!
That the County of San Diego wants money? Or just wants to harass
the homeowners, it's hard to tell. HOWEVER, yesterday DRUDGE ran
this story. Today, Glenn Reynolds.
This means LAWYERS have seen this. And, they can smell a successful
suit from miles away. The San Diego County officials don't have a
leg to stand on. This harassment is against STATE law, as well as
FEDERAL law. And, lawyers always make money when government
officials play 'stupid.' To the homeowners of San Diego Country,
however, those legal bills won't be peanuts. And, you'll lose
services in the bargain. UNLESS? The City Council chaps get
frightened over being pulled out of office. At election time. Or
RECALL. Don't laugh.
|5.29.09 @ 1:02PM|#
I live in San Diego greater. Most of the people who call the law on neighbors are just cranks with time on their hands and hostility to others. Lots of old people do not age well and spend their time ratting out neighbors and being a real community blight, instead of doing the right thing ans sticking their worthless heads into the stove. In my own case I had a particularly awful person file an insanely false report that I had people living in my garage (apparently they were illegal aliens sleeping on the hoods of my two cars to keep warm). The city insisted that they had to see in my garage, so I went along with it, they came along and took pictures. The investigating "officer" was a "badged" building inspector (no doubt they're badged so they can be considered California public safety officers like the hair salon inspectors are, and get in on the giant pension scam that is wrecking the state). The inspector admitted that most of his calls were by cranks causing trouble for neighbors, but they keep on going out anyway. This woman had made many such fradulent reports, but they took no action against her, no doubt to provide an excuse to shuffle papers (hey, I've worked in public corporate administration, I know how the game is played). I let them inspect the garage only through the door and did not let them in my house proper, but I actually should have told them to get a warrant and so should you(I asked what the consequences of refusal were and was told probably nothing, they wouldn't get a warrant and would ignore the report given the source...that says it all). The fact that citizens have to put up with this crap from their "servants" is an outrage, and although I am an agnostic myself, I wish these people the best at kicking the city's butt. A weekly prayer meeting for a few hours is not a big deal that seriously affects other's lives, its just that so many people have become self-absorbed, intolerant, entitled and vile navel-gazers, especially her on the nanny coast.
Untermensch|5.29.09 @ 1:54PM|#
…it's entirely genetic (so don't call me a racist).
That's a whole generation of Nazi eugenicists said about the Jews,
too. Just because you say it's genetic (it's not) doesn't mean you
aren't racist (you are).
JB|5.29.09 @ 2:17PM|#
So Art-POG, I'm a mental defective because you don't agree with
me?
On what issue, btw?
|5.29.09 @ 3:36PM|#
I think all of us Christians, quasi christians (believe but don't go to church) and anyone else who wants to, should march on (i.e., picket) the city counsel downtown and burn the California flag.
|5.29.09 @ 4:14PM|#
TO: Kathy
RE: Out of Curiosity....
I think all of us Christians, quasi christians (believe but don't go to church) and anyone else who wants to, should march on (i.e., picket) the city counsel downtown and burn the California flag. -- Kathy
What did California do? I seem to recall that the problem was with
some cretinous bureaucrat from San Diego County. Not from the Great
State of California.
Or are you an agent provocateur?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[The great atrocities of our civilization have rarely been the acts
of generals or presidents or kings. They have been the doings of
petty bureaucrats acting within the strict confines of the law. --
Alain Simon]
|5.30.09 @ 9:52AM|#
On what issue, btw?
'Mental defective' is a little harsh. "Unique" personality, maybe.
|5.30.09 @ 3:46PM|#
My bullshit detector is going off. Loudly. My best guess is that Reason and all the dutifully outraged commenters in this thread are going to have egg on their faces by the time the truth about this case emerges. The account of the questions asked by the curiously unnamed San Diego "officials" sounds way too pat and too perfect. It smacks of the kind of thing that a certain shade of fundie Christian would invent to provide proof of the terrible persecution that Jeebus's people (constituting a mere 76% majority in the U.S.A.) must endure in a nation that has supposedly abandoned God.
|5.30.09 @ 4:52PM|#
TO: Rogier
RE: Heh
"My bullshit detector is going off." -- Rogier
Sounds like you need to send it back to third-echelon maintenance
to get it recalibrated.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
|5.30.09 @ 4:58PM|#
TO: All
RE: Rogier's 'Mentality'
See what I was 'talking about' in my comment at May 29, 2009,
10:01am in this thread.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Hang on to your hats, the 'fun' is just beginning.]
|5.31.09 @ 7:34AM|#
TO: Art-P.O.G.
RE: Heh
"Former military?" -- Art-P.O.G.
Is the Pope Catholic?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[I don't know what this damned logistics is. All I know is that I
want some. -- anonymous WWI US Army General]
|5.31.09 @ 1:34PM|#
P.S. There is NO SUCH THINK....
....as 'Former Military'.
Having worked mobilization support operations for nigh on 20 years
in the Army, I've learned that they can call you back at ANY
TIME!
And if you don't respond in a 'satisfactory' manner....you go to
Leavenworth for what we called the LONG 'course'.
So. Based on what I've since. Once a soldier, always a soldier.
Whether you like it or not.
|5.31.09 @ 1:36PM|#
P.P.S. And, oddly enough, I just with they WOULD call me
back.
I feel like a retired dalmation, chained to the firehouse wall as
the engines go screaming out the door......{heavy sigh}.....
Interesting Thread|6.2.09 @ 1:06AM|#
"And this is exactly where Christians (like myself) need to put
our efforts. Not on getting things INTO the schools, but getting
the government OUT OF our lives. The only way to protect everyone's
right to religion and expression is to keep it separated."
I find it interesting how the religious right wants government out
of their lives, but only when it has an impact on their own
expression and beliefs. They feel their rights are being violated,
and yet they're the ones trying to make states (CA - as stated in
this article) nullify same-sex marriages. I think the first
response has the right idea - separate religion and give everyone
protection for expression. Separation of church and state -
marriage is religious, but the title has legal validity. Perhaps
marriage should be reserved for religious ceremonies and the state
and federal government should recognize civil unions for all
couples in a committed relationship. Thoughts?
Phil|6.2.09 @ 12:36PM|#
I think the Bible is a bunch of baloney, but this kind of action
is totally uncalled for!
I am fully on the side of the pastor and his wife holding their
Bible study sessions. Officials of no kind have no business
interfering in their lives this way.
I hope it gets resolved in the pastor's favor.
|6.2.09 @ 10:18PM|#
I'm pretty sure they can find some sort of Buddhist meditation
session occurring in someone's house in that county. Wonder if
they're going to bust those as well?
The officers/officials who harassed this group need to renounce
their citizenship and move to mainland China. Then they can harass
people over religion all they want.
|6.3.09 @ 5:03PM|#
TO: Phil
RE: Perhaps....
I think the Bible is a bunch of baloney.... -- Phil
We can talk about that idea at www.comensarations.info. Or
HERE....if you will.
....but this kind of action is totally uncalled for! --
Phil
Good for you.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. I DO have 'proofs' that it isn't "a bunch of baloney". The
problem is that most people who started off thinking the way you do
don't have the courage to recognize the proofs.
It seems to me to be something of what we in the Army would call a
'personal problem'. And I think it has a LOT to do with a concept
known as 'pride'.....
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245