Question of the First Amendment and Traffic Patterns
It isn’t often that a World Net Daily article doesn’t lead to high blood pressure and audible disgust about the regressive mentality of the authors and the vast majority of the readers of the radically right wing news organization. So, I was surprised that I was reading this story today and was in agreement with the authors and those victimized, rich, white people for which the article was advocating.
The city of Gilbert, Ariz., has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city’s zoning codes.
The issue was brought to a head when city officials wrote a letter to a pastor and his wife informing them they had 10 days to quit having the meetings in their private home.
The ban, however, prompted a response from the Alliance Defense Fund, which filed an appeal with the city as the first step in its campaign to overturn a provision it describes as illegal. (Read More Here)Â h/t HolyWeblog
I can’t really get my head around this kind of city government activism. What does it achieve and really could it be this big of a problem that people get together and study the bible?
This as a clear violation of the First Amendment and the church will win the court case. But I also see this as a selective application of rules. What would stop this city from going after any group of people, organized or not, from getting together to say, organize a campaign to elect someone else to the city planning board?
The application of the law needs to be both equal and blind but also fit into the Constitutional framework that makes our judicial system work. Getting people together to talk about divergent ideas is SO clearly protected by the First Amendment, which says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Left, right and center can get behind the benefits this protection provides to our free society.
The liberal elite should jump on this bandwagon and say this isn’t right. Because you know we won’t get together on the Second Amendment with these people, so we can at least come together and fight for the First one.
