I hate it when I find typos in my writing. Sorry. I'd like to blame is on a defective keyboard, but the responsibility is all mine. think is thing; I found an extra comma; me is mean; surely there are others....duh.

Timotheos: First of all, zoning is not absurd. It has been around for hundreds of years, and in this country, was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1926. I will not argue with you that some communities have gone too far with zoning, as I expect that to be the case in some instances. However, zoning is what allows you to live in a neighborhood with similar structures and functions to your own. This is generally a good think, and what prevents a McDonald's, 7-Eleven, strip club, or double-wide next door to you, between you and your neighbor. Most communities have zoning ordinances and all of them have a mechanism for changing them and issuing variances. Zoning boards are usually made up of appointed citizens (and sometimes with a mix of elected officials as well) with an expertise in planning, etc. Often these are architects, civil engineers, etc. With regard to this particular situation, we have no idea how many neighbors, if any, approached Mr. Salman, about the issues affecting the neighborhood during the events. I do know from reading material online that this has been a 7 year battle, and just became a public issue of religious freedom when he started facing jail time.

Ann: Liberty does not mean that we can do anything we want, anywhere, any time. We live in a pluralistic society and there are certain rules and constructs that have been developed over the centuries that makes life relatively pleasant for most of us. Religious freedom also does not me we can disregard the law of the land. There is a lady down the street from us that has regular Bible studies at her house. Well, living in Alabama, I assume they are Bible studies. For all I know they are seances or readings of "The Help." Anyway, my point is that the 15 or 20 cars every week or so is fine. But, if she started having them twice a week, and up to 70-80 cars were there, it might become an issue. As I stated in my message above, this particular instance has been a 7 year battle. Mr. Salman clearly misstated his purpose for the facility, and while I guess it is a judgement at what number a Bible study becomes a church service, thus needing a commercial building, it sure looked like it to me. I don't see anywhere in the documentation where he was told he couldn't hold a Bible study. It seems to be more about numbers and building code than religion. As far as facts, yes, I did read the fact sheet, but it appeared short on fact to me. I also read the fact sheet from the City of Phoenix that laid out the 7 year fight. I'm sure it is missing some personal opinions of those involved, but at least it lays out the timeline and instances in question. As far as other sources, I found more than 10 Google pages with references to this case. As you know, it is very, very hard to find unbiased reporting these days, but it seemed that a couple of posts from the Phoenix News and Christian Post seemed to offer the most unbiased news. If your post showed a clear incident where religious freedom was under assault, I'd be right there with you. I just don't think this case is a good example.

As is the case with many over-hyped stories, this one is not what it seems. It has nothing to do with the practice of religion. It's mostly a zoning thing, and the fact that the neighbors complained endlessly about the noise and traffic during these assemblies, sometimes of over 80 people. I know you are generally opposed to zoning, but it exists, sometimes for a good reason. The "victim" clearly violated the zoning, knowingly, and misrepresented the purpose for his structure. There is a large volume of fact-based data out there on this particular issue. The one you cited does not cover all the relevant facts.