US Supreme Court to Hear Major Religious Freedom Case
February 20, 2005 · By Tom Cerber
Economics clashes with the US First Amendment’s guarantee to religious freedom in an upcoming US Supreme Court Case, Kelo v. City of New London (Conn.). It seems the last 10-15 years has seen municipalities invoke eminent domain arguments to deny building permits for church properties in favor of economic ventures that produce tax income for them. Church properties are tax exempt, making them economically “useless” to cash-strapped municipalities. It’s more useful for them to have a Wal-Mart than a church. The problem got so bad that Congress had to wade in in 2000 to pass a law requiring municipalities to demonstrate a compelling reason to invoke eminent domain.
To my knowledge, this is not such a big problem in Canada. Instead, many lawyers and church leaders worry that they will be unable to provide public services when they worry that their church doctrine runs afoul of Human Rights Tribunals, as is happening right now after a Knights of Columbus group denied a lesbian couple use of their hall for their wedding reception. I’m told some lawyers are advising churches not to offer any public services at all. Others suggest church groups lay out very clear mission and doctrine statements that avoid what might be construed as discriminatory and stick to them.
In the US, economics threatens religious practices. In Canada, ideology increasingly restricts religious practices. We’re no fans of Jihad v. McWorld here at The Politic. So instead I’ll suggest that perhaps these are two examples of how the Alexandre Kojeve’s Universal Homogeneous State comes about when history comes to an end in North America.
[...] Ethics American Politics — Tom Cerber @ 7:41 pm
Recently I wrote about Kelo v. City of New London (Conn.), which is [...]
[...] For at least a year now, intelligent conservatives have maintained that the Liberals’ same-sex marriage legislation represents a significant threat to religious freedoms in Canada (see here, here, and here for examples). Today we recieved the first substantiation of those claims: “The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has ruled in favour of two lesbian women who claim they were discriminated against by a Catholic men’s organization when they booked a hall for their wedding reception in the fall of 2003.” [...]
[...] For at least a year now, intelligent conservatives have maintained that the Liberals’ same-sex marriage legislation represents a significant threat to religious freedoms in Canada (see here, here, and here for examples). Today we received the first substantiation of those claims: “The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has ruled in favour of two lesbian women who claim they were discriminated against by a Catholic men’s organization when they booked a hall for their wedding reception in the fall of 2003.” [...]