San Diego tries to ban Christianity

I just told you effemm. In your eagerness to look responsible and familiar with the law you have overlooked the discretion of the Sheriff.

If the Sheriff had no discretion the post would have no meaning you silly old pompous, pedantic professor of the middle-of-the-road fatuity.

a heckler 's veto

BillRM wrote:

Baloney.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.

Zoning is far down on the totem pole.

BillRM is grabbing at anything that floats by . Hes going to have the pastor now breaking laws that govern drug trafficking.

HEY BILL--stick with one point and law at a time. Try to follow the bouncing ball.

Drug trafficking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seem you are the one taking drugs!

The constitution does not allow you to married a child religion or no religion reasons.

The Constitution does not allow you to write porn concerning raping children as one woman found out.

The constitution does not allow you to carry a conceal firearm without a license to do so.

The constitution is not a blank check in any area including religion and never had been.

Waving the constitution around is kind of pointless it mean what the courts said it mean and they never said that religion grant a blank right to break zoning laws.

The interesting thing is that even the Constitution is divided into segments so that all the rules dont run together. DO you understand?

Its not easy to understand a lot of his writing; seems a bit random n chaotic.
I don 't believe that English is his first language.

What's wrong with that-OmSigDavid? CiceroneImposter's first language is not English and yet, he continues to regale us with nonsense.

Have you ever read any of his convoluted posts?

I think his first language may be Vietnamese!

Double Dutch morelike.

wait, did I detect a breath emanating from the horsie cadaver? He aint dead yet? Gimme that bat!!

Im not sure what you mean about damaged cars and a public nuisance? This was not the Counties complaint. However the county and the Pastor worked together and said that any parking issues will be addressed so that the neighborhood would not be inconvenienced. If the parking issue is resolved, I say this is moot and is of no concern any further by the county unless they truly are out to deny religious or assembly rights.

You're killing me here. First of all what law was violated. The county did not quote any violation of a law. They only said an assembly permit was required because they were holding religious assembly. I said that I agree that if the county had cited parking as an issue in their complaint then they were justified, as long as that parking ordinance is duly enforced on all people in the neighborhood. There are some ordinances and laws that are focused on Inconvenience and I believe that those are legal. (noise for one) But my belief is that the constitution must defer to the rights of the individual when there is no public safety concern. If the inconvenience to others is an issue of public peace then that can be a safety issue. My example would be that a Once a month meeting that takes up street parking would not be an inconvenience as would a weekly meeting with the parking issues. I would say that the right of the individual to assemble in their home is an absolute right provided it did not violate an existing ordinance of parking (enforced among everyone). But could be curtailed if it is an ongoing weekly or daily event. but a monthly event I dont see how they could say that this is an ongoing inconvenience to the community. In that case I think the constitution would protect their right to allow Inconvenience on the community. But again I emphasize that the county did not cite parking ordinances but religious assembly as the issue.

I know!

Gentlemen I am more then sticking the point!

The point being that the Constitution and the bill of rights contain in it does not grant a blank check to block the enforcement of our laws including zoning laws.

To that end, I had listed a number of examples of the courts not blocking or interfering with laws that limit rights that are listed in the Constitution.

To repeat myself the right to be arm does not stop local government from limiting the carrying of conceal weapons, the right to free speak does not stop placing people in prison for some forms of speak and I gave examples that the right of religion does not grant a blank check to break laws that conflict with religion driven practices.

If the good Pastor had broken zoning laws by having large scale meetings in his private residence he is not protected because of the reason for those meetings is of a religion nature.

Short of using a laser beam, I do not know how more focus one could be.

cAN YOU GET THE POINT THAT NONE OF YOUR EXAMPLES WERE EVEN REMOTELY RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE AT HAND. youre just throwing examples from types of poorly articulated case histories onto the wall hoping that one will stick.Using your logic , every time the Supreme Court adjudicates a particular case, every situation that could possibly be conceived is thereby covered.

And that wouldn't do at all would it effemm. Lawyers would be begging in the street.

why dont you just go and quietly vomit your brains out.

You said I haven't got any brains.