More Bible Study Silliness

A few months ago, I addressed the cases of Bible Studies under fire, including that of Michael Salman, a pastor in Arizona who was put in jail for, according to him, holding Bible studies.  However, as time went on, we found out that the real reason this convicted felon was jailed was because, like a convicted felon, he flouted the zoning rules and broke laws with wild abandon.  Now we’re finding out that Salman broke more laws and is up for more felony jail time for Medicaid Fraud.

Now comes word that another family, this time in Florida, is being fined for their Bible Study.  This case seems a little different at first glance.  Shane and Marlen Roessiger have been holding a Bible Study on Friday nights at their home with 10 participants, posted a small sign outside their home offering a phone number for prayer, and now have been issued fines of $250 per day for their zoning violations.  Obviously, it’s a case of the eeeeeeevil government again, right?

Well…  hold up, kids.

1.  The “victim” in this case is not a random person.  His name is one Shane W. Roessiger and his wife Marlene (I’ve seen it spelled differently), and he has a history of clashes with the law over religious issues.  That’s not to say that the law is always right, but when you have a history, it gives more credit to those who say you are currently in violation of the law.

2.  The neighborhood he lives in is a crowded, dense neighborhood.  Even adding 5-6 cars for 10-12 people could cause major traffic headaches for people driving on the streets, especially on a regular basis on a busy Friday evening.

3.  Take a look at this picture of his home from Google Street View.  See the big honking cross he has in his front yard?  Yeah, well…   that’s not the problem.  The problem is that he’s posted a small sign in his front yard that advertises a dial-a-prayer phone number.  The problem is that while the city ordinances are OK with real estate and political signs, any and all other signs are verboten.  So you can’t even post a “puppies for sale” sign in your yard, by law.

So…  what’s happened here?  Well here’s what I’m seeing:

• A dedicated, well-meaning, but aggressive young man starts a home-based ministry.  While he has a history of clashes with the law, he doesn’t appear to be of the “convicted felon” mode of Michael Salman.  I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt here.
• Traffic increases on a regular basis, and while the occasional party would be OK, regular traffic problems cause issues for neighbors.  They ask for help, but get none, and so they go to the city.
• The man puts up a small sign in his yard in violation of local ordinance.
• The city works with the Bible study, offering them ways to mitigate the issue, but are met with defiance.
• After repeated attempts to address the issue, the city issues fines.
• The man, still aggressive and defiant, takes his case to the interwebs and the news media.

Again, we get back to the “vacuum of neighborliness” I mentioned in my previous article, where someone could’ve been a better neighbor, but wasn’t, deciding that it was more important to hold your ground on holding Bible studies than to communicate Godly love to those who live next door to you.  It’s not a government conspiracy – it’s simply a matter of people needing to be good neighbors and show Christian love while they’re supposedly teaching Christian theology, and maybe a little bit of a badly written local sign ordinance.  And let’s be honest: if the government really wanted to crack down on religion, it wouldn’t start with a single homeowner and zoning regs.

That’s why, again, I’m going to post my 7 Rules of Not Being a Jerk About Your Bible Study.  Take heed (again), people:

1. Hosting a Bible Study in your home is a good thing.  Our faith is a critical element of who we are as people, and strengthening that faith through study and fellowship is a wonderful part of growth.
2. Not being a jerk about your Bible Study is an equally good thing.  Just because we have a responsibility to share our faith doesn’t mean we have a right to be a jerk about it.
3. If you’re going to host a Bible Study in your home, be a good neighbor to those around you.  Love your neighbor as yourself by being pleasant about your Bible Study.  Just because you think you have the constitutional right to have a Bible Study doesn’t take away your neighbors’ rights to live in peace.
4. Try to keep your Bible Study size appropriate for your neighborhood.  If you’ve got a 3-bed 1,500 sq ft house in the burbs and you’re hosting 50 people…  you may want to break up into smaller groups.  That way, you limit the amount of traffic on the road and keep transportation around your neighborhood moving smoothly.  You also have less risk of someone ticking off your neighbors by blocking them in their driveways, damaging their lawn, or creating too much noise.
5. Keep lines of communication open between yourself and your neighbors.  Let them know what’s going on and when – and keep to the schedule.  If you say it’s going to be from 7-9 pm, don’t hold things over until 9:30.  Make sure your neighbors have your phone number so that they can contact you if there’s a problem.  If they do contact you with a problem: address the problem.  And invite your neighbors (and don’t get offended if they say no).  Don’t ruin a relationship with someone you share a fenceline with because you’re got a bug up your butt.
6. If you’re holding weekly services with chairs, flyers, a pulpit and a website, you’re a church.  Act like one by providing a safe, friendly environment for worshiping God.  If that means that you’re going to have to move your activities to a more public location, then do so.  Trust God to provide through offerings, donations, etc.
7. Finally, and most importantly: don’t be a jerk.  I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating.  If a neighbor calls you to complain that there’s too much traffic and noise, then listen to them and try to work with them.  If the city shows up and says that you need to have clearly marked exit doors, then go down to Lowe’s or Home Depot and pick up some exit signs.  If the city tells you that the structure you’re in is unsafe for the crowd you’re drawing, then by all means, find another structure or split into smaller groups.  If you’re going to represent Jesus to people, then act like He would.

Read Full Post »

Bible Studies and Jail Time

The Authorities Have Been Contacted

OK, first, read this story about an Arizona Bible Study guy who’s going to jail because of his Bible Study.

Now read this one about a California couple that was fined for their Bible Study.

It’s a war, right?  Surely, it’s a sign that there’s evil afoot and a war on Christianity and it’s time for us all to get to arms to defend the rights of these gentle-hearted, innocent people who just want to read the Bible and learn about Jesus, right?

Not right.

A lot of my friends and colleagues have brought the first case to my attention over the past few days with the wide-eyed expression awaiting the obvious shock and dismay I must feel at this obvious encroachment by the government upon the rights of the church…    that never comes.  See, while I am of the strong opinion that there is a war on my faith being conducted by secularists and other people who want to use the government to evangelize us all into atheism, I’m pretty sure this isn’t the case in either of these cases.

Both of these cases share a few common points:

1. A family decides to hold a home-based Bible Study.
2. Said Bible Study gets really popular and a lot of people (usually between 25-50) start showing up on a regular basis.
3. The authorities show up citing something about zoning and public safety.
4. The family decides eventually to go to the media to fight their war.
5. Fines and/or jail time plus public outrage ensues.

Simple enough, except that there’s a few points missing, most importantly, between #2 and #3.  This is a spot that I like to call “the vacuum of neighborliness”, where neighborliness should have existed, but instead, we get a gigantic hole in the story.  So, let’s fill that hole with the clues we have, namely: the number of people showing up.  25-50 people typically means you’re getting between 10 and 20 additional cars in your neighborhood, creating traffic congestion, noise, and crowding.  In a rural area, this isn’t really a problem, but in an urban area, this causes major issues for other people who live in the neighborhood, not to mention the ability for emergency vehicles to navigate the area. And so, someone called code enforcement.

I’ve known some code enforcement folks in my time and the general gist I’ve gotten from them is that they really, really don’t want to stir up trouble.  Their lives are happier if they don’t have to play the bureaucratic ombudsman for neighbors who aren’t talking to each other anymore, and they would really rather just let things go.  Typically, this means that people get inspected.  Someone usually tries to contact them informally to see if the issue can be resolved.  If it can’t, then they go to  warning letters.  Then repeat letters.  They try to work with the person in question to see if adaptations can be made to the property to allow them to legally continue their venture.  It goes on and on until it’s obvious that someone’s just being a jerk about the whole mess and that’s when fines start going out.  And I’m willing to bet some reasonably good money that this is exactly what happened in California. The end result there was that the homeowners worked it out with the city and all was well.

In Phoenix, not so much.

What we actually have here is the case of a convicted felon – one Michael Salman, who’d served 6 years for shooting up people’s homes and who tried to bribe a state attorney on the matter.  He was sentenced to 6 years in prison back in 1993 for the crimes.  In 1996, according to his website, 3 years into his sentence, he was ordained by the COGIC and began his ministry, and ended up hosting what he called a Bible Study in his home in the early 2000′s.  Said study would have anywhere from 40-80 people, depending on whether or not people were getting baptized or not.  All the problems actually began back in 2007 when Salman applied to the city for a 2,000 expansion to his “game room”.  It was approved, so long as said expansion wasn’t used for any business or church-related activities due to zoning and safety requirements like fire exits, accessible bathrooms, etc.  By the time it was done, said game room didn’t include much in the way of games, but did include chairs, a podium, a pulpit, and a sign with the name of the church.

In other words: he lied to the city to get his expansion approved without having to meet the standards for a public building like a church.

In 2008, after getting am $18,000 fine issued for safety violations, he was granted the right to label his home as a church by inspectors.  This saved him tax money, but now he has to actually meet the standards for a church building, including safety regulations.  If 40-80 people are going to gather, then  you’re going to have to address issues like emergency exits, bathrooms, and parking.  Salman hasn’t done so.  The City has been fighting him for over 5 years and now he’s getting sent back to his home from the early 90′s to think about what he did.

Is it reasonable for a city to do this?  Well, let me ask you this: would you be OK with me building a structure in a crowded urban neighborhood out of dry tinder with a single 1-person entrance and exit, and holding church services during a lightning storm for 125 people?  You shouldn’t be OK with it because it’s an unsafe situation.  If a fire starts, there will be death, and if there’s cars blocking the path for emergency vehicles, it becomes a threat, not only to those gathered inside, but to the neighbors as well, since fire has this tendency to “spread rapidly”.  Although my libertarian friends may disagree, providing for the general welfare and public safety is one of the most basic requirements of local government.  Throw in the deceitful, uncooperative behavior by Mr. Salman and I’ll say it: yes, it’s perfectly reasonable for a city to require that buildings where people gather en masse for whatever purpose are safe for the people inside, the people outside, and any public safety personnel that may have to enter the structure.

And this, kids, leads us to what I like to call my rules of not being a jerk about your Bible Study.  I’ve used these before, expanded on them, elaborated, but they’re pretty definitive and I think you should pay attention, memorize them, and repeat them over and over.

1. Hosting a Bible Study in your home is a good thing.  Our faith is a critical element of who we are as people, and strengthening that faith through study and fellowship is a wonderful part of growth.
2. Not being a jerk about your Bible Study is an equally good thing.  Just because we have a responsibility to share our faith doesn’t mean we have a right to be a jerk about it.
3. If you’re going to host a Bible Study in your home, be a good neighbor to those around you.  Love your neighbor as yourself by being pleasant about your Bible Study.  Just because you think you have the constitutional right to have a Bible Study doesn’t take away your neighbors’ rights to live in peace.
4. Try to keep your Bible Study size appropriate for your neighborhood.  If you’ve got a 3-bed 1,500 sq ft house in the burbs and you’re hosting 50 people…  you may want to break up into smaller groups.  That way, you limit the amount of traffic on the road and keep transportation around your neighborhood moving smoothly.  You also have less risk of someone ticking off your neighbors by blocking them in their driveways, damaging their lawn, or creating too much noise.
5. Keep lines of communication open between yourself and your neighbors.  Let them know what’s going on and when – and keep to the schedule.  If you say it’s going to be from 7-9 pm, don’t hold things over until 9:30.  Make sure your neighbors have your phone number so that they can contact you if there’s a problem.  If they do contact you with a problem: address the problem.  And invite your neighbors (and don’t get offended if they say no).  Don’t ruin a relationship with someone you share a fenceline with because you’re got a bug up your butt.
6. If you’re holding weekly services with chairs, flyers, a pulpit and a website, you’re a church.  Act like one by providing a safe, friendly environment for worshiping God.  If that means that you’re going to have to move your activities to a more public location, then do so.  Trust God to provide through offerings, donations, etc.
7. Finally, and most importantly: don’t be a jerk.  I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating.  If a neighbor calls you to complain that there’s too much traffic and noise, then listen to them and try to work with them.  If the city shows up and says that you need to have clearly marked exit doors, then go down to Lowe’s or Home Depot and pick up some exit signs.  If the city tells you that the structure you’re in is unsafe for the crowd you’re drawing, then by all means, find another structure or split into smaller groups.  If you’re going to represent Jesus to people, then act like He would.

I know all this is a bit of a veer from my usual Obama-bashing, and that may be shocking to some of you, but at the end of the day, conservatives and Christians should be smarter than this.  Don’t give in to conspiracy theories and manipulation by charlatans and criminals.  Be smart.  Listen up.  Learn stuff.

Read Full Post »

The Problem With Separation of Church and State

School in the…   wait for it…  liberal Democrat-leaning state of New York…  censored an art student’s contribution to a mural.  They had tons of religious imagery on the wall, but the minute a student who believed that Jesus was the Way, the Truth, and the Life decided to paint a cross and a few song lyrics, the school felt that she’d crossed the line.

Scary!

Painting a mosque?  Fine.  A demonic creature?  A-OK.   The Taj Mahal?  10-4.  A Native American totem pole?  Yee-hah.  A cross?  BLACKLIST THE TWIT!!!

Look, I’m all for not pushing religion on people.  I am a dedicated, strong, stubborn Christian, but I know that there are people who neither share my faith nor want to share my faith.  And while I do believe I am called to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ and to let you know the Good News that He can save you from your sins and the penalty to come if you only repent and believe in Him…  but I’m also well aware that the best way to communicate the Gospel is to build a personal relationship with people and to meet them where they are so that you can point them to the Cross.  An ineffective method would be sticking students in a classroom and indoctrinating them via a state-approved religious curriculum.

Having said that, there seems to be a mistake made by the anti-religious crowd and bureaucrats, that our precious little angels – and by extension, our precious little public – must be freed from any expression of religious (read: Christian) belief in the public circle.  They crow about the separation of church and state and point out that the Supreme Court has ruled that prayer isn’t allowed in any classroom, ever!  Ha ha ha!

Silly people.  Silly, evil people.

Let’s take a quick look at the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

There’s a lot of meat in there, but it’s meat that’s easily identified and served up. Let’s stick with just the stuff that sticks with this case.

1.  Congress shall make no law.  This is pretty simple: the first amendment is a restriction on the actions of Congress, not the people.  Much like the 2nd Amendment protects the right to bear arms, the First Amendment protects the rights of the people.

2.  An establishment of religion.  Again, pretty simple: Congress is not allowed to declare an official religion of the United States.  This was because many of the American colonies were founded by Christian people for religious purposes, and those Christian groups sometimes didn’t get along, sometimes even with themselves.  By avoiding the establishment of a national religion, those debates were rendered moot at the Federal level, even though every single colony still acknowledged Almighty God in their charters.  Today, this has been extended to other religions.

3.  Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.  The Federal Government cannot keep you from practicing your religion.  If you want to practice Voodoo, that’s your business (so long as you’re not breaking any laws in doing so).

4.  Or abridging the freedom of speech.  Again, while there are reasonable limits placed on this right (you can’t yell fire in a theater, you can’t threaten someone’s life, etc.), it’s typically accepted that the government is not allowed to tell you what you can and cannot say.  Simple?  Sure.

So where did we get lost?  In my ever-loving opinion, it started in the 1980′s, when the Supreme Court ruled in Abington Township v. Schempp , where they introduced the “secular vs. religious” test.  Later, in Allegheny County v. Greater Pittsburgh ACLU, the court went full retard, ruling that having the words “Gloria in Exelcis Deo” was illegal because that was totally religious, but it was OK to have a Menorah, because that’s totally secular.  By entertaining a micromanagement approach towards the free exercise of religion, the Court empowered those who want to push a secularist religion like atheism.

This leads to incidents like this, where the same people who thought it was evil, wrong, super-evil censorship to ban the sale of 2 Live Crew albums in Florida think it’s perfectly OK to paint over a student’s artistic expression of admiration for her God because, Lord knows someone might see her picture and get magically forced by the school board to join the Baptists.  They’re so busy enforcing point #2 of the amendment that they miss #3 and #4.  They’re taking a very liberal view of the constitution, where one can change the plain meaning of the constitution as it suits the situation (hence why I join Alonzo Rachel in rejecting “progressive” as a label for people who are more accurately described as “liberal”).  This liberal view means that the freedom of those who should be protected by the constitution is subject to the whims of a government bureaucrat.

Read Full Post »