Mosque Construction Permit Rejected by Culpeper County Board


NBC4 Washington:

Mosque Construction Permit Rejected by Culpeper County Board

Muslim leaders in Culpeper County, Virginia, are accusing the county board of discrimination in a battle over an Islamic Center. The board rejected the leaders’ plans, but they told Northern Virginia Bureau Reporter David Culver how they plan to move forward with construction anyway. (Published Thursday, April 14, 2016)Members of a small Muslim community in Culpeper Couny, Virginia, bought land where they plan to build the county’s first mosque – but the county board denied them a permit, saying the site doesn’t meet requirements.
A group of locals that has grown to more than 20 members seeks to create the Islamic Center of Culpeper (ICC). The group began meeting in 2011, first in a train station and then in a small home next to a member’s car dealership.

“It was really small and like a family, and it’s still like that,” member Dr. Nabeel Babar said.
As the size of the group grows, members want a proper prayer space. They recently closed on a property off Rixeyville Road with an abandoned house surrounded by weeds.
But on April 5 the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors denied the ICC’s request for a sewage system permit. A roomful of Culpeper County residents cheered, the Culpeper Star-Exponent reported.

In a 4-3 vote, the board denied the ICC a pump-and-haul permit for a septic system, in which waste is directed to a tank and then pumped out by a septic tank cleaner. Board members said they rejected the permit out of compliance with the law, the newspaper reported.
But in the past 20 years, the county has rejected only 1 out of 19 similar permits in the past 20 years, the Star-Exponent reported.

I don’t see how Christians can complain about persecution while discriminating against others.


This Slate article on the matter is a bit more direct in asking why some organizations that have recently claimed to be for religious liberty have been silent on the matter.


Nothing in the written portion of the article gives any evidence of anything other than people trying to put something on a property that the property can’t support and stay within county requirements. Why does everybody automatically assume discrimination?


I think discrimination gets assumed because any of us (were we gamblers) would with reasonable confidence be prepared to bet that were the building in question a church instead, it would have been found to have met the requirements without much difficulty.


So, you just assume that the people of Culpepper County, VA, a suburb of Washington DC, are “Islamophobes”, despite never having met anyone from there, or being unlikely to even be able to identify the place on a map? Gee, how open minded of you…


That’s what I thought too. It’s all about sewage. But then I read this.. It seems the ICC would only need the pump and haul permit for a few years until the municipal sewer line extend to them. And 18 out of 19 such permits have been issued, including to five churches. The public outcry seems to be more a factor than technical sewer issues, if you read how the board meetings go.


The news article in the first post linked to an article which was published by the local newspaper. That newspaper article mentioned that the county supervisors were contacted by constituents at a level surprising for a septic tank permit. Often the callers were concerned about religion. The supervisors who voted in favor of the permit made statements which seemed to be pleading not to be punished for their vote. For example:

Jefferson District Supervisor Brad Rosenberger , in supporting the permit application, said it’s been a long time since the board had struggled with a decision like the one before them Tuesday. He noted that he too had received many calls.

“I understand where people are coming from,” Rosenberger said, adding that the decision made him “go back to the basics.” He said he had taken the oath of office nine times, swearing to uphold the U.S. and Virginia constitutions.

“I hope you have an appreciation for that oath I took,” Rosenberger said, mentioning the 14th amendment granting equal protection under the law to all American citizens. “I hope you have respect for the angst board members have been through,” he said in voting for the permit.


If the report is accurate then the founding fathers are looking down at this wondering to themselves…did the folks from Culpeper county forget about what we had to say about freedom of religion?

Even Senator Ted Cruz knows what I am talking about here…freedom of religion in the USA allows for Jews to build synagogues and for Muslims to build Mosques. The folks whom are against Muslims being able to have Mosques are going against the founding fathers. I know, I get that groups like black lives matter are distorting the message of folks on the so called left just as some trump supporters distort the message of the right. But the truth is, is that most Americans whether on the so called right or left…are totally fine with having Muslim neighbors, co workers and Muslims being able to build Mosques here in the USA.


So called Islamic Centers are more than just mosques.

They function as education, recreational and banquet facilities.

So, if apparently the sewage issue is a valid issue for rejecting the permit



The Founding Fathers were very critical of Islam. Some of the letter between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were often quite scathing in there criticism. The first foreign war the US was engaged in was against Muslim pirates on the Barbary Coast. It’s probably fair to say that the Founding Fathers would have thought that Islam incompatible with the principles and values upon which they founded our government. Appealing to the Founding Fathers doesn’t help your case very much.

Given the current state of the Middle East and the problems Europeans are having with their Muslim refugees, citizens of Culpepper County not wanting to import those problems doesn’t seem an irrational response.


Well stated ucfengr :thumbsup:


When Christians complain about persecution in America, what they are really complaining about is how difficult it is becoming to maintain Christianity as the preferred religion.


In general, the founding fathers would agree with what I have said itt.


The report says,

On December 9th, 1805, Thomas Jefferson hosted the United States’ first iftar at the White House. It was an unintentional event, one that occurred as a result of Jefferson’s scheduled meeting with an invited envoy from the Tunisian government. It was the end of the first Barbary War, and Jefferson was anxious to establish better diplomatic relations with the North African states while ensuring the security of American interests in the Mediterranean. Upon being informed of the envoy’s fasting to observe the Islamic month of Ramadan, Jefferson had the mealtime at the White House changed from 3:30 in the afternoon to “precisely at sunset” in an effort to accommodate his guest. This gesture on behalf of the president was not simply a diplomatic one, but one that demonstrated Jefferson’s familiarity and comfort with Islam, a faith that interested him since his time as a student at the College of William & Mary. Indeed, Jefferson’s interest in the Qur’an and his own study of Arabic led to his active promotion and eventual creation of an Oriental Languages department at his alma mater. As a scholar and a diplomat, Jefferson was keenly aware and interested in the world outside of America and the importance of cultural and intellectual capital to the success of the United States. In studying his Qur’an and the documents that he produced as a part of his nation-building efforts, we see just how Jefferson deployed his knowledge and perhaps how influential Islam was to of one of the nation’s founding fathers.

Jefferson hosted a dinner for a Muslim at the white House…this is quite remarkable and is something that the Anti Muslim sources make no mention of when discussing Thomas Jefferson and Islam. Without a doubt, the USA has been involved in wars…we have fought against both Christians and Muslims in these wars…BUT…we have also had Muslims siding with the USA apparently going back as far as the American revolution.

I would imagine that some of the founding fathers may have had controversial views of Muslims and other non Christians…For example James Monroe once dismissed a man from political office merely because the man was a Jew.

The Barbary Pirates did take actions against the USA…but so did the UK wrt the war of 1812. Warfare does happen, its a part of human history. At the same time peace treaties have been made between groups that were once enemies with each other.

Just as the KKK did not = all Christians being intolerant…ISIL does not equal all Muslims being intolerant.


Holycrusader…let’s say they let the mosque be built. Ten years down the line, a new imam comes. This imam is different than the previous one…let’s say this one has ideals more like Isis than the Muslim that died protecting people on that bus in Africa radical instead of peaceful). What then?

And the Barbary pirates were attacking ships…


Hi JimR

Some of the Islamic centers are known as a Madrasa. In the Madrases so called secular subjects like English and Science are taught. In the Madrases there are non Muslims who are learning side by side with Muslims.

Just like how Jews and Catholics have their own schools…so do Muslims have their own schools. I think that it is an anti Christian/anti human thing when folks call into question these types of schools just because they are religious. There are today Madrases around the world making the world a better place. If their is a Madrasa in for example ISIL land…then we are looking at a terrorist school…not a proper Islamic Madrasa. Proper Islamic Madrasas teach that Muslims and Non Muslims are fully equal and that any violence or rude language toward people is wrong.


Good question there Jediliz,

Any Imam in the USA who for example preaches that ISIL is a good group…is going to get arrested and put in a jail cell…where they belong. So I do believe that US law answers your question.

They were attacking ships, they were known as Pirates after all. I don’t approve of that type of action but at the same Jefferson…being the great diplomat that he was…tried to work out a peace deal. And make no mistake the US forces fought valiantly in the Barbary wars.


where does it say these are Christians denying the permit?


Jim, name me a Christian church that doesn’t also function as an education, recreational and banquet facility. Ever been to a church supper, for example?


You are wrong. The Founding Fathers would not have agreed with what you said.

This is what John Quincy Adams had to say about Islam:

In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE. (emphasis in the original)

Joseph Story, the Father of American Jurisprudence, said in “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States”:

It is impossible for those, who believe in the truth of Christianity, as a divine revelation, to doubt, that it is the especial duty of government to foster, and encourage it among all the citizens and subjects….

Indeed, in a republic, there would seem to be a peculiar propriety in viewing the Christian religion, as the great basis, on which it must rest for its support and permanence, if it be, what it has ever been deemed by its truest friends to be, the religion of liberty.

Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation


the real object of the [First] amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance Mahometanism, or Judaism, or infidelity by prostrating Christianity; but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment which should give to a hierarchy the exclusive patronage of the national government

James Iredell, one of George Washington’s Supreme Court Justices wrote:

But it is objected that the people of America may perhaps choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that pagans and Mahometans may be admitted into offices… But it is never to be supposed that the people of America will trust their dearest rights to persons who have no religion at all, or a religion materially different from their own


For your reading enjoyment:

Obama, Thomas Jefferson and the fascinating history of Founding Fathers defending Muslim rights

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit