OPINION: Religion wins big
Churches have been under attack by local governments throughout the country in recent years because some local officials don't much care for religious freedom. It gets in the way. But a federal court decision, in which a judge put Boulder County commissioners in their place, may go a long way toward protecting religious liberty.
Anti-religion city and county politicians never tell people they can't worship Jesus, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Most are far too savvy for that. Instead, they protect us from religion in the interest of causes identified as noise, traffic, neighborhood character, and "car trips," all of which have become more important than religious freedom in our increasingly secularist society.
Even in religion-heavy Colorado Springs we have seen petty municipal codes used to impede the free exercise of religion. In 2004, for example, a Catholic priest was ticketed for serving two ounces of wine during Mass outside an abortion clinic, violating the city's liquor laws. It seems unreasonable for a liquor ordinance to trump the First Amendment's prohibition against impeding the free exercise of religion.
In nine hearings over three years in the late '90s, Congress compiled evidence of widespread contemporary discrimination against religious institutions by state and local governments. A Brigham Young University study found that 20 percent of cases adversely affecting the location of religious institutions involved Jewish organizations, even though Jews account for only 2 percent of the country's population. A study of 29 jurisdictions in and around Chicago found that secular land-use applications for meeting halls, health clubs and lodges were given permits while nearly identical plans by religious organizations were typically denied.
One expert testified to Congress that a pattern of abuse uses pretexts such as traffic, safety, or behavioral concerns "to mask the actual goal of prohibiting constitutionally protected religious activity."
Congress heard about the 50 elderly Jews who were forbidden by Los Angeles leaders to meet for prayer in a private home, even though similar assemblies for secular activities were allowed. They heard about a New York beach community that barred a synagogue because "it would bring traffic on Friday nights," when Jews begin observing the Sabbath. Members heard about the college freshman who was told by Nebraska regents she couldn't live in a Christian fellowship house for students, because of a requirement that freshman live in dorms. They heard about a policy in Newark, New Jersey, that prevented Sunni Muslims working as police officers from having their religiously required beards.
Routine hurdles to religious liberty led Congress to pass RLUIPA, the Religious Liberties Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. It basically tells local governments that religious liberty is more important than local concerns about traffic, noise, aesthetics and neighborhood character. Most local politicos hate it, because they're not in the business of promoting freedom and limited government. They're in the business of protecting constituents from noise, traffic, and annoying uses of private property.
"This law (RLUIPA), as written, may very well require us to elevate religious uses above everything else," squawked Boulder County Commissioner Ben Pearlman.
Yes, that's what it requires government to do. It's all about that pesky First Amendment thing.
Our country was founded to keep government authority in check with gun rights, free speech, free association, free media, and the right to hold deity as the highest authority. In a 1785 letter to James Madison, Thomas Jefferson wrote: "It was not, however, to be understood that instruction in religious opinion and duties was meant to be precluded by the public authorities as indifferent to the interests of society. On the contrary, the relations which exist between man and his Maker, and the duties resulting from those relations, are the most interesting and important to every human being, and the most incumbent on his study and investigation."
Get that? A person's relationship with deity, and related duties, are the most important. Referring to land use, Jefferson wrote that legislators should not subdivide without valuing "the natural affections of the human mind."
But forget all that freedom nonsense. When Rocky Mountain Christian Church wanted to expand its facilities on its own turf to provide space for education and recreation that would be open to the greater community, county officials couldn't stomach the idea and they refused to approve permits. Goodness sakes, a bigger church might result in more "car trips," and we all know that freedom results from limited car trips.
Boulder County has lost every legal maneuver it has attempted regarding the church. On March 30, Federal District Judge Robert Blackburn ruled that denial of permits impaired the church's right to free exercise of religion. A jury found that Rocky Mountain Christian's application was treated unfairly, relative to applications by nonreligious organizations. Blackburn ordered Boulder County to pay all of the church's substantial legal fees from the beginning of the dispute.
In church, synagogue, temple or home this week, thank God, the federal courts and Congress for upholding one of the most basic tenet of limited government and freedom: religious liberty.
