Opposition to the RLUIPA
Redefining Religious Freedom
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act creates a difficult situation because there is by no means a consensus about it among traditional supporters of the separation of church and state. Like earlier attempts under different names, this bill was supported by an unusual coalition of religious and civil liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Christian Coalition, Family Research Council, and People for the American Way. These are organizations that almost always find themselves on opposite sides in religious disputes.
Terri Schroeder, an ACLU legislative representative, has been quoted as stating that:
The balance between the needs of religion and the larger community's concerns has been off kilter for far too long. This bill will restore the equilibrium.
So what is really wrong with the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act if organizations like the ACLU and PFAW support the it? Aren't they usually on the forefront of attempts to defend the separation of church and state? Well, yes, they are - but in this case, they are on the wrong side.
Opposition has come almost solely from municipalities and local government associations - groups which stand to lose the most if religious organizations can just ignore zoning laws. Jane Hague, president of the National Association of Counties, has said that she finds it
...profoundly disturbing that one certain kind of property owner will be able to disregard regulations written to protect the common good.
Los Angeles Assistant City Attorney, Anthony S. Alperin said:
Rather than treating religious uses in a fair and equitable way with respect to similar uses, it treats them in a much different and or favorable way...We should treat religious uses the same as other uses. We should treat them from a zoning standpoint on the basis of what their impacts are on the surrounding communities.
The ACLU had earlier supported revised attempts to pass the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but dropped out once they were forced to admit that it would undermine local anti-discrimination laws. Only time will tell if they admit having made a mistake here again.
-->