Religious freedom and Holly's zoning laws

If a zoning law will not allow a church to be established because of most any other reason other than it is a church, than it should receive the support of the community. But in Holly Township, a local zoning law states that a church specifically can not be established in a commercial district. Now a church that is in a commercial district is appealing the law, as they should.


Pastor James Disbrow and his Carpenter’s House Church have less than a year before he and his congregation is to be evicted from their current location. It is housed in a building in an area that Holly Township has designated to be used for commercial purposes only. If you go to Fish Lake and Grange Hall Road where the church is located, it would be difficult for you to tell what the location is zoned. It is mostly open land and very few buildings. There is no apparent reason why this church or any church would be risking the order and safety of the community.

But, no matter what the area is zoned, a house of worship of any kind has the right to be located most anywhere.

The Federal Council of Churches in Christ and the Foreign Missions Conference of North American adopted a position on the placement of churches throughout the world. The Foreign Missions Conference assists churches and missionaries in other parts of the world. Some of those places may not be as tolerate of religion as we are in the United States. In part, they state, that churches should be able to “acquire and hold property, for [religious purposes].” There doesn’t seem to be a good reason why a “church” specifically should be excluded from an area zoned commercial.

The only exception would be for the order and safety of the community because no right is absolute. Then, the community needs to have a clear reason to exclude a group like a church. Perhaps it would be because of traffic or large numbers of people attending an event at all the same time. To state that a church can not be placed in a specific area is like saying you can only have freedom of speech in some areas or you can’t own a gun in the city limits. (The Supreme Court recently struck down laws that ban gun ownership in cities across the country.)

Holly needs to review its current zoning laws to insure that religion is not impeded specifically because of religion. By banning churches from commercial areas the township is violating a basic right of an individual and a group, the freedom of religion.

-----

Government agencies do work for all of us

At the beginning of this country until even just 50 years ago, people knew where everything came from that they ate. The corn on the table in mid summer was from the farmer next door. The turkey at Thanksgiving was from the common woods on the outskirts of town where everyone hunted. The bread, if not made by the family, came from the local baker. He got the flour from the mill. The mill owner purchased (or traded) the wheat from the farmer across the street. Everything we ate came from just a few miles away. The food was fresh and not highly processed.

Everyone knew the wheat farmer, they knew the mill owner and they know the baker. All of them went to the same pub, square danced on Saturday nights and went to church on Sunday… sometimes twice. If anything went wrong with the food supply, everyone knew it. If the farmer found his wheat to be bad, he told people so they wouldn’t get sick. If he didn’t he would be seen in the pub, at the square dance and church on Sunday (maybe twice).

Thomas Jefferson, a farmer himself, wrote about the benefits of an agricultural society. When he and others like him came together for the second time to create a government, they didn’t see the need for a Food and Drug Administration. After all, why do we need a government agency to watch the food supply and for the most part, what are drugs?

Let’s jump forward 250 years to the present. Now, it is claimed by some, that government is taking control of our lives with agencies that tell us what to do and taking away our freedoms. One such agency is the Food and Drug Administration. It is partially tasked with watching our food supply to insure its safety both from natural born pathogens and poisons placed on or in them by processing. The agency occasionally gets something wrong, but for the most part, it works for the community’s benefit.

Ask why we need the agency and the answer is in the front page of the newspapers occasionally. Most recently is the Iowa egg producer, Wright County Egg and another company called Hillandale Farms. The owner, Austin J. DeCoster, said he would apologize to congress this week for the illnesses caused by the decades of bad eggs he released on to the market. The decisions that the owner and management of the company made were not made in the best interests of the community, only profit as he himself admitted.

He would have been tarred and feathered 250 years ago as described above. Everyone would have known where the eggs came from, if they had been sold at all. Placing responsibility and taking action would have been quick and clear.

The Food and Drug administration can not place all responsibility off on the farmer and the market. The administration's short comings will come to light and corrective action will be taken. But, the administration does make two very good points that need to be addressed.

First, the agency needs enough money to operate. It is becoming very common that government agencies that work for the benefit of the community are being under funded because of the anti-government fears that are being pushed by the small government commandos. They wax nostalgic when talking about the original intent of the county and how “massive” and “over bearing” government has become. By using Ronald Reagan’s tactics of underfunding government agencies if he couldn’t get rid of them, the agencies stay out of the way of businesses because they are not able to fully execute their function. This leads to less inspection and less long term legal work that is needed to end those companies that are consistently not in compliance.

Second, they need to provide the tools and weapons that are needed. In this case, the eggs were re-pact many times by suppliers. Nothing wrong with that, those companies that sell the eggs to the end user would like their names on the package, not Wright County Egg. (Seems that is a good decision in light of the bad pr that Wright is currently receiving) But, the eggs aren’t required to be sourced labeled. That means when people began to get sick from the bad eggs, health detectives had a more difficult time tracing the source back to Wright County Eggs. This not only delayed the reaction time to find the other bad eggs, it stalled all egg supplies from those producers that did a good job. More people became sick and more sales were lost. The effort to pass legislation to require source labeling has stalled many times in congress because of the industry lobbyists.

250 years ago, Thomas Jefferson and the other founders could not have conceived such a complex and wide spread market place that we have now. Since we are not able to personally know the people that produce our food today and see them on Sunday at church, we need a way to help keep the food supply safe. Since we didn’t form communities to still do everything for ourselves, agencies that work on our behalf is the best way to approach this problem.

Don’t fight government just for the sake of fighting government. There are some ways that we can reduce the size of government but don’t let it get in the way of safety.

-----

Individuals must do the responsible thing to make any law work

In Texas they have a law that children that attend a day care and are transported should not be left in the vehicle.  It is called “Jacob’s Law” after a little boy four years ago died in a van after being left for many hours. Before you say, “duh” read on.


Just a few days ago it happen again.

Avonda Fox worked for many years to get the legislature in Texas to enact the law. Her drive was to do some good as a result of the loss of her son Jacob when he died in a hot day care van. Her son was left in the van in temperatures that was in triple digits in 2006. The owner of the day care facility told her employees to take the body to the park and not call 911. The owner only received two years in prison for her failure to take appropriate and responsible action.

It happen again in Plano, Texas. Police have released few details in the latest death. But, the child was left in the van at 9 in the morning and wasn’t discovered until 3 in the afternoon, when a child entering the van found him “asleep”.

Nothing, repeat, nothing will be able to replace the two lost children to their families. It was good that the law was enacted because apparently you can only get two years for such a thing.

But, no law, no matter how tough on the convicted can replace personal responsibility in situations like this. Was there no head count as children left the van? How about a last check after everyone is checked in? Was someone errant, or uncaring, to not remember?

Laws are meant to guide us in our actions and to provide punishment for those that don’t follow the law. Laws, no matter how well written, will only work if people take personal responsibility to do the right thing. One of the foundational planks of any community is individuals acting in a way that is best for themselves, their families and the community.

-----

To open carry gun supporters: No right is absolute

If I stood on a milk crate at Fourth and Main in downtown Royal Oak and made a speech about the up coming election, I would be arrested for disturbing the peace. If a group of friends planned a gathering in the park near by to protest the war in Afghanistan, we would be ticketed if we hadn’t received a permit from the city.


Both are part of our rights as guaranteed in the Constitution. Communities can place limited and reasonable restrictions on those rights. But, people who want to carry guns think they should have rights that are not limited.

No right is absolute. The right of free speech, assembly, to bear arms and many other rights are listed in the Constitution. There are many other rights that are not detailed but are reserved by the people. But, the community has the right and responsibility to place reasonable limits on those rights. Of course, there must be a balance between the right and the community’s need for safety and order. No right can be limited without just cause.

In this case, the open carry laws, the community should have the right to limit the possession of a weapon. Royal Oak is requesting the state make a minor change in the laws to allow it. Currently, the open carry laws state that individuals can not carry a weapon in any theater with over 2,500 people and other places. The city would like it to read “venue” instead of “theater” so that Arts, Eats and Beats can ban open carry guns.

The law would not ban guns absolutely. Individuals will still be able to own guns. The change in the law would allow local communities to place reasonable limits on the possession of a weapon at events that are as large as the festival in Royal Oak.

Festivals like the Arts, Eats and Beats festival doesn’t create civil unrest where people may need to protect themselves. The media has reported that no one was arrested during the four day event. The government isn’t strong arming the public where guns may be needed for a revolution. The festival is just an entertainment venue of art, food and music. There simply is no need to openly carry guns strapped to the hip.

The request that Royal Oak is making of the state is a reasonable limit on the right to bear arms.

-----

End drug use and end the violence in Mexico

The drug violence in Mexico can be stopped if we focus on the problem not the symptom.

The United States is arguably the biggest consumer of illicit drugs in the world. Exporters of anything, including drugs, would not have a market if it wasn’t for people buying their products. Because there is such a big market here in the United States for drugs, competing cartels are killing each other along with innocent by standers in an effort to dominating the lucrative market. This violence will soon spill over across the border. We will only have ourselves to blame.

It isn’t just Mexico, it is also in Afghanistan. The history of Afghanistan over the last 100 years is filled with drugs. The farmers in the country could not make enough money by raising food crops. They turned to poppies, the plant that heroin is produced from, because the profit is so enormously high. The Taliban, looking for easy income to fuel their war against the world, took control of the distribution.

Where does the money go? To purchase weapons that enable groups in both countries and others around the world, to continue their violence.

What are we doing about it? A lot of nothing. The war on drugs is a failure in this country. We fiddle around the edges treating symptoms and irrelevant issues while drug use continues to grow out of control. Nationally, the debate has been side tracked by focusing on illegal immigrants that were here before and will be here after the war is “won”. (The war will never be won. No politician will be able to declare victory or even an end to conflict. The community must be for ever vigilant about drug abuse.) Politicians tell us of beheadings in the southwest desert from the drug traffic, yet, no evidence of a beheading from the drug traffic can be found.

Here in Oakland County it is worse. Michael Bouchard, a normally very able public servant, and his sheriff department raided drug dens around the county arresting pushers and abusers. Little or none of the marijuana that was seized came from a foreign source. The abusers were people that have a demonstrated need for the drug to ease the pain or discomfort of their illness. (Don’t be naive you say, there are those that are using it for recreation. I am not. I am aware of that. But, the drug is legal in the state and that isn’t where the problem is.)

Resources where diverted from the real drug problem at the same time the sheriff department is cutting an already thin budget. Legislatively, there are lots of politicians now that will be planning adjustments in the current litany of laws to define a problem that is small compared to the abuse of other drugs.

There are plenty of laws to control this problem. Law enforcement agencies need to have enough money to investigate and prosecute drug offenses. Drug courts need to both deal harshly with the “pushers” at the same time they punish and treat the abuser.

The loss of life in Afghanistan of our own young men and women is high. The damage to our foreign policy from this war is punishing. The war will soon be coming to a country even closer, Mexico, if we don’t get our drug problem under control.

-----

What every kids knows

Kids playing ball in the street know when a ball is hit into your yard, they should walk lightly in retrieving it because it is on private property. People walking down the sidewalk know that the yard around each house is private property. If someone pulls their car into your driveway they can expect to be challenged if they are uninvited.


So why does the Ninth District Court of Appeals in California think that it is okay for police to not know what everyone else knows? In a case that is expected to reach the Supreme Court in Washington, the court ruled that police can walk on to your property in the dead of night, place a gps device on your car and then track your moves for as long as the device works. In this particular case, Juan Pindeda-Moreno (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JUAN PINEDA-MORENO, Defendant-Appellant - No. 08-30385) is suspect of growing marijuana. His Jeep was parked in his driveway next to a trailer, his home, while he slept in the middle of the night. Police tryed to catch him in the act of visiting his little farm decide to attach the gps to the car in the middle of the night.

The court ruled, with only one dissent and two appeals to the same court, that people do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy when their car is parked in the driveway. Since the court doesn’t know what everyone else knows, that your driveway is your private property, it stated that police could then attach the device to carry out their mission.

Courts must take an overview and often wax philosophically in crafting a ruling. Application of law is not always as straight forward as it seems. But, in this case, the court applied a ruling that doesn’t resonate with real life in the community. If we can’t have an expectation of privacy around our home, then where can the line be drawn? The court said that fences, no trespassing signs, borders or other things must be built before our privacy can be guaranteed. That may be reasonably true when we approach a farmer’s field where the line from on piece of property to another may be blurred. But, any reasonable individual walking or driving down a street would have a very good idea where the yard of a house is and that motor vehicles in that yard are on private property. Before police can approach a car in that position, they must have a search warrant.

This is an erosion of our rights to the community and off sets that balance between individuals and the community. By the way, this ruling happen in the middle of August and here we are in September before we hear about it in the media. It took the media much too long to mention this case. When asked, the Supreme Court should over turn this ruling and push back the line to a place of reasonable balance.

A balance that even kids playing in the street of any neighborhood knows.

-----

Freedom of Speech and Religion

Do you fully support the freedom of religion and expression in the community? The events of the last few months and the next couple of weeks are testing that resolve.


Pastor Terry Jones of Dove World Outreach Centre in Gainesville, Florida is planning on burning copies of the Koran on September 11, 2010. The pastor has chosen that day because it is the anniversary of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Pastor Jones and the congregation of his church believe that Islam is, in their words, “the devil.”

The pastor of the church and members of his congregation do have the right to freedom of expression. If they feel that this is the best way to present their case about Islam, then they do have the right to make that statement. A few years ago a Dutch newspaper ran an editorial cartoon that Muslim’s considered offensive. Part of the reason the newspaper ran the cartoon was to exercise their right of expression. It was rightfully supported by communities in the West and newspapers across Europe ran the same cartoon in support.

The church also has freedom of religion. A community’s primary foundation must include members having the right to express their religious beliefs in any peaceful manner that best suits them. This includes using church property, personal or real, to fulfill what they consider their mission. An example of this comes directly out of the headlines of the last few months, the mosque that is planned for New York City. The members of the mosque would like to use their property to fully express their religious beliefs just like Pastor Jones, no matter how disrespectful it may seem to other members of the community. The community needs to support both decisions; the building of the mosque and the burning of the Koran; no matter how disrespectful it may seem to others.

There are those that have threaten violence against the pastor, the church and the community if the church does burn the Koran. Some people may carry out the threaten violence. The community must stand against individuals that promote and execute violence, seek them out and bring them to trial.

The church’s true underlying motives should not go unchallenged. The pastor says that he believes Islam is the devil and, “The world is in bondage to the massive grip of the lies of Islam.” Pastor Terry Jones says that he wants to warn of the world of the dangers of Islam and states on the Dove World Outreach website that, “To warn of danger and harm is a loving act.” But it is difficult to see how the burning of the Koran is a loving act or that it will convert anyone to Christianity. It is simply a hateful act that is being done just to get attention. If it will not save anyone from Islam, than the act is a “falsehood” that should be rejected.

But, even though burning the Koran is a disrespectful and outrages act that will not help Pastor Terry Jones’ cause or bring greater understanding to the cause of peace in the community, it is both an exercise of the freedom of expression and of the freedom of religion. The Responsible Community must support those rights. It is the same reasoning that is used in support of the building of the Mosque in New York.

A free community is one that allows each individual, no matter how disrespectful it may seem, to fully express their own religious beliefs in a peaceful manner.

-----