Judge grants Tenn. mosque's petition to open

[Dale_M]

Muslims in a Tennessee congregation prepared Thursday for the holy month of Ramadan a day after a federal judge ruled they have a right to occupy their newly built mosque, overruling a county judge's order that was keeping them out.

The Islamic Center of Murfreesboro sued Rutherford County on Wednesday and asked U.S. District Judge Todd Campbell for an emergency order to let worshippers into the building before the holy month of Ramadan starts at sundown Thursday.

The future of the mosque had been in question since May, when a local judge overturned the county's approval of the mosque construction. This month, he ordered the county not to issue an occupancy permit for the 12,000-square-foot building.

http://news.yahoo.com/judge-grants-t...14.html?_esi=1

The county judge ruling was that the meeting which approved the construction permit was not adequately advertised. The meeting had been given the same notice as every other such meeting, but the judge said that this was an issue of special interest and required more public awareness.

U.S. Attorney Jerry Martin argued that the earlier ruling created a separate "mosque standard," which applied only to persons who wanted to build a mosque.

[Dale_M]

News Update

As Ramadan begins, controversial mosque won't be ready to open doors

The mosque -- subject of a two-year battle marked by legal wrangling, vandalism and anti-Muslim sentiment -- still needs to pass inspection and get its occupancy permit, mosque officials said.

"It is unfortunate that we cannot be in our building for the start of Ramadan tonight," Islamic Center of Murfreesboro officials said in a written statement. "However, it does look like we will get to enjoy most of Ramadan in our building, especially the breaking of the fast at the end of Ramadan, on Eid-ul-Fitr."

The release said it will take about 10 days to complete the next legal steps.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justic...uit/index.html

[ringil]

What is wrong with this community that they wouldn't want a religious gathering place in thier midst- is it simple bigotry?

[Other Eric]

Originally Posted by ringil

What is wrong with this community that they wouldn't want a religious gathering place in thier midst- is it simple bigotry?

Even if no one ever used it, I would not want an abortion clinic to open its doors in my community. How much more, then, ought I protest the opening of an organization that does so much worse, not merely by attacking the body, but by introducing errors into the immortal soul?

[BlueEyedLady]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

Even if no one ever used it, I would not want an abortion clinic to open its doors in my community. How much more, then, ought I protest the opening of an organization that does so much worse, not merely by attacking the body, but by introducing errors into the immortal soul?

Well fortunately in our country the first amendment protects people of all religions, even the ones that you consider false. It also protects speech and peaceful assembly. We have our share of problems, but the first amendment isn't one of them.

[JharekCarnelian]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

Even if no one ever used it, I would not want an abortion clinic to open its doors in my community. How much more, then, ought I protest the opening of an organization that does so much worse, not merely by attacking the body, but by introducing errors into the immortal soul?

We are comparing mosques to abortion clinics now? Classy.

[Other Eric]

Originally Posted by BlueEyedLady

Well fortunately in our country the first amendment protects people of all religions, even the ones that you consider false. It also protects speech and peaceful assembly. We have our share of problems, but the first amendment isn't one of them.

I think you need to reread your history. The United States was founded as a Christian nation. Therefore, those creeds falling outside of common Christian conceptions also fall outside the protections of the First Amendment. That such creeds are permitted at all is subject to the tolerance of the larger, Christian community and are legitimately regulated by secular authority. The First Amendment was never meant to imply that individuals have a "right" to be in error.

[rossum]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

Even if no one ever used it, I would not want an abortion clinic to open its doors in my community. How much more, then, ought I protest the opening of an organization that does so much worse, not merely by attacking the body, but by introducing errors into the immortal soul?

So, when a group of Protestants wants to close all Catholic Churches in their area for "introducing errors into the immortal soul" you would support them?

Freedom of religion applies to everyone, not just to those religions you happen to agree with. If you stop someone else because you disagree with their religion, then anyone who disagrees with your religion will be able to stop you.

rossum

[JharekCarnelian]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

I think you need to reread your history. The United States was founded as a Christian nation. Therefore, those creeds falling outside of common Christian conceptions also fall outside the protections of the First Amendment. That such creeds are permitted at all is subject to the tolerance of the larger, Christian community and are legitimately regulated by secular authority. The First Amendment was never meant to imply that individuals have a "right" to be in error.

Ironic in light of the prejudice Catholics faced in US history.

[OU812]

Originally Posted by BlueEyedLady

It also protects speech and peaceful assembly. We have our share of problems, but the first amendment isn't one of them.

Oh, I don't know about that. Some things that are allowed to be uttered are completely bigoted and vitriolic. Even some of the things we allow as freedom of expression just make me shake my head.

[Other Eric]

Originally Posted by rossum

So, when a group of Protestants wants to close all Catholic Churches in their area for "introducing errors into the immortal soul" you would support them?

Freedom of religion applies to everyone, not just to those religions you happen to agree with. If you stop someone else because you disagree with their religion, then anyone who disagrees with your religion will be able to stop you.

rossum

I suggest you brush up on Originalism. There is a reason why it violates religious freedom to, say, force the Catholic Church to provide contraception but does not violate this same freedom when the Native American Church is prohibited from using peyote in its religious rituals. The distinction is this: one is Christian and involves principes identical with the nation's founding documents; the other is a non-Christian entity whose existence and praxis is permitted only by the indulgence of the Christian majority of this Christian nation. Therefore, one is justly subject to regulation where the other is not.

[JharekCarnelian]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

I suggest you brush up on Originalism. There is a reason why it violates religious freedom to, say, force the Catholic Church to provide contraception but does not violate this same freedom when the Native American Church is prohibited from using peyote in its religious rituals. The distinction is this: one is Christian and involves principes identical with the nation's founding documents; the other is a non-Christian entity whose existence and praxis is permitted only by the indulgence of the Christian majority of this Christian nation. Therefore, one is justly subject to regulation where the other is not.

Here was me thinking your nation was not founded to support any particular faith.

[Other Eric]

Originally Posted by JharekCarnelian

Here was me thinking your nation was not founded to support any particular faith.

Perhaps it would be better if you based your judgements on facts rather than platitudes.

[agnes therese]

Originally Posted by ringil

What is wrong with this community that they wouldn't want a religious gathering place in thier midst- is it simple bigotry?

Yes, bigotry is exactly what it is. And I'll be the same people opposing it are the first to scream if they think their own constitutional rights are being violated.

[agnes therese]

Originally Posted by Other Eric

Therefore, those creeds falling outside of common Christian conceptions also fall outside the protections of the First Amendment.

Perhaps you'd like to show us where the First Amendment says that it only applies to Christians.