A campaign to end government involvement in education has seen rapid expansion of its efforts in the wake of Dr. James Dobson’s advice to parents to remove their children from California public schools.

In the week following Dobson’s March 28 Focus on the Family radio broadcast, the Alliance for Separation of School and State reports the number of new signers to its Internet-based “Proclamation for the Separation of School and State” increased from an average of five per day to over 100 per day.

Alliance’s proclamation states simply: “I proclaim publicly that I favor ending government involvement in education.” More than 15,000 individuals have electronically signed the proclamation, including Domino’s Pizza founder Tom Monaghan, Cato Institute President Edward Crane, Conservative Caucus founder Howard Phillips and best-selling “Left Behind” series co-author Tim LaHaye. A complete list of proclamation signers can be found on the group’s website.

As reported by WorldNetDaily, during his broadcast, Dobson said if he had children in California, he “wouldn’t put the youngster in a public school.” The traditional-values advocate added, “I think it’s time to get our kids out.”

Alliance’s proclamation also received a boost after radio advice guru Dr. Laura Schlessinger announced her agreement with Dobson during her April 9 broadcast. “I stand with Dr. James Dobson,” she declared. “Take your kids out of public schools.”

On the same day, popular Christian talk-show host Marlon Maddoux also gave his support to Dobson.

Founded in 1994, Alliance’s goal is the end of federal, state and local involvement with schooling, particularly in K-12 education. “We believe government has no role in financing, operating, or defining schooling or even compelling attendance,” states the group’s website.

Alliance President Marshall Fritz said, “Our mission is to reestablish parental control of education by eliminating the government control, which has led to propaganda masquerading as education.”

A non-profit, non-denominational organization, Alliance has set an ultimate goal of 25,000,000 signatures – enough to make the idea of school-state separation more appealing to “political movers,” states the group’s website.

Government schools, universally dubbed “public” (and sometimes “common”) schools, have come under intense scrutiny in recent years. Changes in education philosophy and social morals, as well as ever-increasing taxes to pay for government schools that produce dubious results, have brought the debate between public and private schools to a fevered pitch. Fritz’s organization has reached the conclusion that “common schools,” while appearing to be fair when they began in the mid-19th century, simply don’t work.

“The Common School wasn’t so bad for 100 years; they imparted the Protestant majority’s values to mostly Protestant kids. Some groups escaped (e.g., Christian Reformed, Seventh Day Adventist, and Catholics); others were small and took their lumps (e.g., Jews, atheists, and Jehovah’s Witnesses). The flaw of the common school only became clear to traditionalists when the tables were turned on them,” reads an Alliance explanation of what the group considers public schools’ fundamental flaw.

Over the last 50 years, “modernists” have controlled much of society, says Alliance, and are using schools to impart their idea of what is “good” – the definition of which often conflicts with those who call themselves “traditionalists.” Identifying itself with “traditionalists,” Alliance hopes to detach schools from all levels of government, allowing groups of like-minded individuals to educate their own children in their own way.

“Compromise is not possible: Some want prayer in school, some want condoms. Printing prayers on condoms satisfies nobody. Communities are split,” the group’s website explains.

Home-school advocates agree and have long sought separation from government education establishments.

“Home-schooling is a version of private-schooling. It is private-schooling,” said Karen Taylor, a trustee of the California Homeschool Network.

Though CHN has seen no discernible increase in home-schooling due to the Dobson and Schlessinger broadcasts, Taylor believes the current backlash against public schools is increasing awareness that home-schooling is a legitimate option to public schools. And the fact that Dobson and Schlessinger have now publicly become part of that backlash will help more parents find alternatives to government-sponsored education.

“Many people look to them for guidance and respect their viewpoints,” Taylor said.

But while private schools may be tolerated by public-school advocates, home-schooling is often rejected as ineffective and even damaging by critics.

Since 1988, the National Education Association has maintained the position that “home-schooling programs cannot provide the student with a comprehensive education experience.” This, despite the fact that home-schoolers consistently outperform their public school counterparts in standardized tests. The NEA is one of the largest and most powerful unions in the United States.

Alliance’s “Proclamation for the Separation of School and State” can be viewed and/or electronically signed at the organization’s website.

Related stories:

Dobson to Californians: Quit public schools

District digs in its heels over home educators

District ‘harasses’ home educators

NEA vs. home schools

Clinton wants to ‘organize’ home schoolers

]]> http://www.wnd.com/2002/04/13540/feed/ 0 http://www.wnd.com/2002/03/13322/ http://www.wnd.com/2002/03/13322/#comments Fri, 29 Mar 2002 01:00:00 +0000 Julie Foster http://wp.wnd.com/?p=13322

As President Bush advances the war against terrorism, enjoying overwhelming support from Americans across the political spectrum, a Washington, D.C.-based government watchdog group has released a report citing the president’s “failure of leadership” in the area of ethics enforcement.

Judicial Watch, a public-interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, said it supports President Bush in the war against terrorism but that government malfeasance must continue to be exposed in the meantime. To that end, the group released its report titled, “Bush Administration Ethics Enforcement: A Failure of Leadership.”

The 49-page report outlines what Judicial Watch calls the “disappointing record of the Bush administration’s disinterest in rooting out and fighting corruption,” including the administration’s treatment of Clinton scandals such as “Pardongate” and “Chinagate.” It also reviews Bush’s decision to retain Clinton appointees and the president’s refusal to cooperate with investigations into Enron.

Perhaps most frustrating to many Bush supporters was the president’s decision to overlook any criminal behavior of former President Bill Clinton. During Clinton’s final day in office, the outgoing chief executive pardoned a staggering 138 people, many of whom were Clinton campaign contributors. While that action alone drew a flurry of media attention and scrutiny, evidence that a number of the pardons were actually purchased by recipients made “Pardongate” Clinton’s parting-gift scandal to the American public.

However, many of the pardons were left unfinished, which, according to Judicial Watch, afforded newly inaugurated President Bush the opportunity to cancel them. As explained in the report, presidential pardons are only effective in forgiving the crimes specified in the president’s pardon. Further, pardons may only take effect when the warrant is issued, delivered and accepted.

“Quite simply,” states the report, “a warrant cannot be issued and delivered without knowing what was the express basis of the pardon.”

Clinton’s last-minute statement read:

After considering the requests for executive clemency of the following named persons, I hereby grant full and unconditional pardons to the following named persons for those offenses against the United States described in each such request: …”

“The problem is that at least 44 of the 138 individuals Clinton listed had no pending requests before him,” the Judicial Watch report states. “Well-established case law, going back to the 19th century, mandates that pardons be specific as to the offenses being pardoned in order to have any legal force or effect. This makes sense, as any pardonee could otherwise use a general, unspecific pardon to be protected from prosecution for any crime committed – whether known or unknown. And, the law is also well-established, that until a pardon is delivered, a President may cancel it – even if it was first issued by his predecessor.”

President Bush chose not to undo Clinton’s procedurally unfinished pardons. Additionally, the administration has made no indictments relative to accusations that some pardons may have been purchased, and none are expected in the future.

Bush merely repeated his mantra that it was time for America to “move on.” When asked whether it was a good idea for Congress to investigate the controversial pardons, Bush responded to reporters on Air Force One on Feb. 13, 2001, “You know, the Congress is going to do what they’re going to do. My attitude is, you know, all this business about the transition – it’s time to move on, it is. It’s time to stay looking forward, and that’s what I’m going to do.”

The Bush administration is apparently looking so far forward that it has all but forgotten Clinton’s “Chinagate” scandal. Perhaps taking a cue from Clinton-appointed Attorney General Janet Reno, Republican Attorney General John Ashcroft stood by while his Justice Department let “Chinagate” player James Riady slide with a soft plea agreement and refused to prosecute him for breaches of U.S. national security.

Riady, whose Indonesian/Chinese conglomerate Lippo Group is believed by U.S. intelligence to be a front operation for Chinese intelligence, illegally gave Clinton millions of dollars through his company, in addition to personal contributions. Riady enjoyed close contact with the White House. His former employee, John Huang, was placed in a sensitive position at the Clinton Commerce Department, where Judicial Watch discovered Huang had access to classified briefings. During Riady’s sentencing hearing last year, Bush Justice Department lawyer Dan O’Brien said Riady would not be prosecuted for breaches of U.S. national security.

“To this day, a year after the Clinton-Gore team left office and the Justice Department was manned by Bush appointees, not one official from the Clinton-Gore White House or campaigns has been indicted concerning campaign finance law violation,” the report states. Bush and Ashcroft’s “failure of leadership in this area is inexcusable.”

While Bush supporters may have found it surprising that the Republican president’s administration has chosen not to pursue charges against the notoriously corrupt Clinton administration, many were shocked when Bush elected to keep several Clinton-era appointees on his Republican leadership team.

One of the most perplexing Clinton holdovers was FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was in charge at the time thousands of FBI files on former President Bush’s staffers were delivered to Hillary Clinton and her staff at the White House – the scandal referred to as “Filegate.” Freeh, who resigned in mid-2001, also took no action on the “Chinagate” scandal and was ultimately responsible for such botched FBI actions as Waco and Ruby Ridge.

IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti was also held over from the Clinton administration. Rossotti oversaw the audits of a number of perceived political enemies of Clinton – audits Judicial Watch charges were illegal. Among those victimized by Rossotti’s IRS was the Western Journalism Center, which published ads questioning circumstances surrounding the death of Clinton’s White House Counsel Vincent Foster. Judicial Watch represents several targets of the audits in pending lawsuits, including the Western Journalism Center.

Also among Bush’s questionable appointees, Judicial Watch lists Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, whom Bush selected after his first choice, Linda Chavez, withdrew from consideration over charges she harbored an illegal alien in 1992. As reported by WorldNetDaily, Chao and her father have extensive personal ties to communist China’s President Jiang Zemin – contact described as “regular” and “deep.”

Chao’s relationship with Jiang stems from her father, James S. C. Chao, who attended college with the Chinese president before fleeing for Taiwan in 1949, in advance of the communist government takeover of the mainland.

One day before the 2000 presidential election, “Chinagate” player John Huang revealed that Chao had asked him for political contributions for former Sen. Alfonse D’Amato, and that her husband, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had received contributions from the Lippo Group.

Despite this, Chao’s confirmation by the Senate was relatively swift in comparison to Bush’s other nominations, some of which are still lingering in the Senate.

More recently, the Enron scandal is cited by Judicial Watch as a Bush administration ethics lapse. Enron’s Kenneth Lay was a major Clinton donor and had attended a trade mission with the late Ron Brown to India in January 1995. Lay received hundreds of millions of dollars from the Clinton administration for Enron’s energy projects in India and elsewhere.

In its efforts to further investigate the Enron debacle, Judicial Watch made Freedom of Information Act requests of the Bush administration. But the administration continually refuses to turn over Enron-related documents, the group reports. Such refusals “raise the inference that [the Bush administration] is hiding something,” the Judicial Watch report states.

Many other actions, or non-actions, by the Bush administration are listed in Judicial Watch’s report, including the decision not to investigate vandalism of White House offices by outgoing Clinton-Gore staff, charges of illegal fund-raising on the part of Vice President Dick Cheney and the treatment of government whistleblowers.

“After eight years of the worst corruption this country has ever seen, Judicial Watch had hoped that the Bush administration would begin the hard work of bringing ‘justice’ to this town. It has not. What Washington, D.C., needs is an ‘ethics stimulus package,’ its centerpiece being a commitment to prosecuting the crimes of the Clinton era,” said chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.

While a White House spokesman told WND he would review the report, he did not comment on its contents and conclusions.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton observed that though Clinton may no longer be in office, the former president’s ethics are still influencing White House practices.

“As we can see with the Enron scandal (which has its roots in the Clinton administration), Bill Clinton may have left Washington, but Clintonism remains,” he said.

The report, “Bush Administration Ethics Enforcement: A Failure of Leadership” is available at Judicial Watch’s website.

Related stories:

Bush FBI pick tied to Reno cohort

The real Elaine Chao

Elaine Chao’s ties to Chinese leader

White House vandalism report delayed

A Canadian judge in British Columbia has issued a controversial ruling in which he both convicted a man of possessing child pornography and said the defendant’s written works of pornography have “artistic merit.”

John Robin Sharpe was convicted Tuesday of possessing pornographic photographs of boys. Yet Judge Duncan Shaw declared Sharpe’s written materials to be legal in light of the Canadian Supreme Court’s definition of “artistic merit.” The written material consists of two books: “Sam Paloc’s Boyabuse: Flogging, Fun and Fortitude – A Collection of Kiddiekink Classics,” to which Shaw refers simply as “Boyabuse,” and “Stand By America, 1953.” Each short story in “Boyabuse” and the plot of “Stand By America, 1953″ are summarized in graphic synopses in Shaw’s ruling.

Sharpe has been the pivotal character in Canada’s child-porn debate, which heated up in 1999. At that time, Sharpe defended himself against child-porn charges, arguing that Canadian law on the subject contravened freedom of speech provisions in the federal Charter of Rights. Shaw, a justice of the British Columbia Supreme Court, agreed. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court of Canada, which rejected Shaw’s initial decision and drew a fine-line definition of “artistic merit.”

That definition states in part that, “unless written material advocates or counsels the commission of sexual crimes with children under 18 years of age, the possession of such material is not a crime under the child pornography provisions of the Criminal Code.” According to the high court, “any objectively established artistic value, however small, suffices to support the defense. Simply put, artists, so long as they are producing art, should not fear prosecution” under Canadian law.

With the high court’s new guidance, Shaw had to reconsider the original charges against Sharpe. His decision was published Tuesday.

While Sharpe signed an admission that photos seized at his Vancouver apartment could be classified as child porn, he expressed concern about the treatment of his writings, according to Canadian press reports. During his second trial, Sharpe’s lawyers called two professors who testified that the defendant’s writings had literary merit and therefore are legal under the Supreme Court of Canada ruling. Prosecutors, however, called other witnesses who said the writings were crude and childish.

In his decision, Shaw treated the photographs and written materials separately. On the former, Shaw was convicted on two counts, but he was acquitting of two counts pertaining to his writings. Shaw admitted Sharpe’s “writings simply describe morally repugnant acts,” but the writings do not expressly “advocate or counsel” the commission of the acts, he wrote. Therefore, the judge reasoned, Sharpe’s work has artistic merit and is legal. The decision reads:

“While ‘Boyabuse’ and ‘Stand By America, 1953′ arguably glorify the acts described therein, in my opinion they do not go so far as to actively promote their commission. The descriptions may well be designed to titillate or excite the reader (if the reader is so inclined) but these descriptions do not actively advocate or counsel the reader to engage in the acts described. Nor, in my view, do ‘Boyabuse’ and ‘Stand By America, 1953′ send ‘the message’ that sex with children can and should be pursued. If that were the case, then literature describing murder, robbery, theft, rape, drug use and other crimes in such a way as to make them appear enjoyable would likewise be said to advocate or counsel the commission of those crimes. In my opinion, such literature is not what the ‘advocates or counsels’ requirement is intended to capture. Where written material is simply a thinly disguised exhortation to seduce children or to otherwise make them prey to sexual crimes, such writing may well advocate or counsel such crimes. But that is not the case with ‘Boyabuse’ and ‘Stand By America, 1953.’”

Shaw further explained his reasoning behind accepting Sharpe’s written pornography as art:

“Mr. Sharpe’s portrayal of people, events, scenes and ideas are reasonably well written. He uses parody and allegory, not expertly, but he does use them. His characterization is thin, but it does exist and at times is expressed with a reasonable degree of skill. His plots show some imagination and are sometimes fairly complex. In my view, ‘Boyabuse’ and ‘Stand By America, 1953′ are properly termed transgressive literature. Mr. Sharpe shows skill in the literary quality of his work and the literary devices that he uses, although not to the level of most established writers.”

Canada Family Action Coalition, a group that has closely followed Sharpe’s case, is disgusted by the ruling.

“This case, in our opinion, is a true violation of what the law says,” remarked Brian Rushfeldt, executive director of CFAC. “There is no reasoning for such a ludicrous decision. How can a judge consider artistic value when a criminal act such as sexual abuse is encouraged?” he asked. “This decision is a travesty of the justice system.”

CFAC is a non-denominational grass-roots citizens-action group that seeks to restore Judeo-Christian moral principles in Canadian society.

Rushfeldt believes freedom of speech, which he says is “ill-understood,” cannot be argued in Sharpe’s case. “Free speech ends where the advocacy, proposition or suggestion of harm to another human being starts,” he said.

CFAC believes Tuesday’s decision will contribute to what it says is Canada’s reputation as a haven for child pornographers and pedophiles.

“We’ve become known as the destination for sexual predators and pedophiles because of our low age of consent, because of the soft sentences our predators are getting here and because of the easy paroles,” Rushfeldt said. “They know that their chances of actually getting charged and jailed are pretty slim.”

To help combat the problem of child sexual abuse, CFAC has begun a campaign to raise Canada’s age-of-consent law for sex. Currently, a child age 14 or older may legally have consenting sexual relations with an adult. In the United States, adults can be found guilty of statutory rape if they have sex with children under 18, even if the sex was consensual.

Part of CFAC’s effort to change the law includes a letter drive to Canadian Justice Minister Martin Cauchon. So far, the group reports it has collected about 20,000 letters from Canadian citizens demanding an increase in the age of consent. The letters will be delivered to Cauchon and Parliament before the Canadian House of Commons adjourns for the summer, said Rushfeldt.

While the Sharpe case has added to CFAC’s list of concerns, Rushfeldt indicated the group remains focused on its campaign to keep kids from becoming victims of sexual abuse. Part of that battle, he added, is reforming a system that appears “not to be placing any value on the lives of children.”

“Our main concern is that we have a government in our country and a justice system which are clearly failing to protect children from sexual predators,” he concluded.

In an effort to influence high-school science curriculum standards, more than 50 Ohio scientists issued a statement this week supporting academic freedom to teach arguments for and against Darwin’s theory of evolution.

Released Wednesday, the statement was signed by 52 experts from a wide range of scientific disciplines, including entomology, toxicology, nuclear chemistry, engineering biochemistry and medicine. Some are employed in business, industry and research, but most teach at state and private universities. A third of the signatories are employed by Ohio State University.

The statement reads, in its entirety:

To enhance the effectiveness of Ohio science education, as scientists we affirm:

• That biological evolution is an important scientific theory that should be taught in the classroom;

• That a quality science education should prepare students to distinguish the data and testable theories of science from religious or philosophical claims that are made in the name of science;
• That a science curriculum should help students understand why the subject of biological evolution generates controversy;
• That where alternative scientific theories exist in any area of inquiry (such as wave vs. particle theories of light, biological evolution vs. intelligent design, etc.), students should be permitted to learn the evidence for and against them;
• That a science curriculum should encourage critical thinking and informed participation in public discussions about biological origins.

We oppose:

• Religious or anti-religious indoctrination in a class specifically dedicated to teaching within the discipline of science;

• The censorship of scientific views that may challenge current theories of origins.

Signatories released the statement as the Ohio State Board of Education works to update its curriculum standards, including those for high-school science classes, in accordance with a demand from the state legislature issued last year. Advocates of inclusion of evolution criticisms believe the Ohio scientists’ statement echoes similar language in the recently passed federal education law, the “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.” Report language interpreting the act explains that on controversial issues such as biological evolution, “the curriculum should help students to understand the full range of scientific views that exist.”

As part of its efforts to update the science standards, the Board of Education held a moderated panel discussion on the question, “Should intelligent design be included in Ohio’s science academic content standards?” The debate was conducted during the March 11 regular board meeting and included two panelists from each side of the issue, who were given 15 minutes each to present their arguments. One of the panelists in favor of including “intelligent design” arguments (the idea that biological origin was at least initiated by an intelligent force) was Dr. Stephen Meyer, a professor at Whitworth College in Washington state and fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture.

Meyer has written extensively on the subject, including a column for WorldNetDaily in which he criticizes the PBS series “Evolution.” The series, he wrote, “rejects – even ridicules – traditional theistic religion because [religion] holds that God played an active (even discernible) role in the origin of life on earth.”

Additionally, Meyer co-wrote a February 2001 Utah Law Review article defending the legality of presenting evolution criticism in schools. The article states in its conclusion that school boards or biology teachers should “take the initiative to teach, rather than suppress, the controversy as it exists in the scientific world,” which is a “more open and more dialectical approach.” The article also encourages school boards to defend “efforts to expand student access to evidence and information about this timely and compelling controversy.”

Dr. Robert DiSilvestro, a professor at Ohio State and statement signatory, believes many pro-evolution scientists have not given Darwin’s theory enough critical thought.

“As a scientist who has been following this debate closely, I think that a valid scientific challenge has been mounted to Darwinian orthodoxy on evolution. There are good scientific reasons to question many currently accepted ideas in this area,” he said.

“The more this controversy rages, the more our colleagues start to investigate the scientific issues,” commented DiSilvestro. “This has caused more scientists to publicly support our statement.” He noted that several of the 52 scientists on the list had signed after last week’s Board of Education panel discussion.

However, panelist Dr. Lawrence Krauss, chairman of Case Western Reserve University’s physics department, said intelligent design is not science. ID proponents, he explained, are trying to redefine “science” and do not publish their work in peer-reviewed literature. In a January editorial published in The Plain Dealer, Krauss wrote that “the concept of ‘intelligent design’ is not introduced into science classes because it is not a scientific concept.”

Promoters of ID bemoan “the fact that scientists confine their investigation to phenomena and ideas that can be experimentally investigated, and that science assumes that natural phenomena have natural causes,” his editorial continues. “This is indeed how science operates, and if we are going to teach science, this is what we should teach.” By its very nature, Krauss explains, science has limitations on what it can study, and to prove or disprove the existence of God does not fall into that sphere of study.

Krauss was disappointed in the Board of Education’s decision to hold a panel discussion on the subject, saying the debate was not warranted since there is no evolution controversy in scientific circles.

“The debate, itself, was a victory for those promoting intelligent design,” he said. “By pretending there’s a controversy when there isn’t, you’re distorting reality.”

But Meyer counters that a controversy does exist over the validity of Darwinian evolution, as evidenced by the growing number of scientists publicly acknowledging the theory’s flaws. For example, 100 scientists, including professors from institutions such as M.I.T, Yale and Rice, issued a statement in September “questioning the creative power of natural selection,” wrote Meyer in his WND column. But such criticism is rarely, if ever, reported by mainstream media outlets and establishment scientific publications, he maintains.

At the Board of Education’s panel discussion, he proposed a compromise to mandating ID inclusion in science curriculum: Teach the controversy about Darwinism, including evidence for and against the theory of evolution. Also, he asked the board to make it clear that teachers are permitted to discuss other theories of biological origin, which Meyer believes is already legally established.

But such an agreement would only serve to compromise scientific research, according to Krauss. “It’s not that it’s inappropriate to discuss these ideas, just not in a science class,” he concluded.

Related Special Offers:

“Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?”

“Tornado in a Junkyard”

“Triumph of Design and the Demise of Darwin”

John Thoburn, the famous Fairfax, Va., golf-park owner who was jailed this year for not changing the location of trees on his property, has filed with the county a request that would allow him to build townhouses in place of the driving range.

Saying he needs to make money to pay legal bills and fines, Thoburn submitted the proposal in June. If county supervisors approve the request, Thoburn would still need to apply for a change in zoning before he could tear up the driving range and build houses. Current zoning requirements limit development to one house for every two acres. Thoburn’s proposal suggests dramatically increasing the housing allowance.

The businessman is also considering selling the property to a developer. If Edgemoore Properties buys the 46-acre golf park, Thoburn plans to rebuild the driving range on another portion of his family’s 92 acres.

border=0> John Thoburn’s driving range in Fairfax County, Va.

“I have a wife and three children to feed,” he says on his website. “I have a mortgage to pay. I can’t afford to close my business until Fairfax County bureaucrats get around to making their arbitrary zoning decisions.”

The sale or development are needed, he says, to pay a $48,500 fine levied against him for contempt of court – $500 for each day he was in jail. He has also been ordered to reimburse the county $32,000 for its court-ordered re-landscaping of the golf park.

During a May hearing, Thoburn testified that the driving range loses $500,000 a year. On top of that, he is more than 60 days behind on his mortgage, owes $100,000 in back taxes to Fairfax County and $25,000 to the Internal Revenue Service.

While Thoburn may have struggled to get his venture running in the black since he filed his first zoning request for the 46-acre driving range 10 years ago, the property owner’s problems began in earnest about four years ago. At that time, he was charged with zoning violations for improperly landscaping his property.

But Thoburn claimed he met the requirements as they were spelled out when he received his first permit in 1994. He said he had already planted 700 trees and shrubs at a cost of $125,000 and that a previous county official had agreed the landscaping work was sufficient. It was only after he applied for an amendment to the permit that the county interpreted the landscaping plan differently and accused him of noncompliance, he said.

border=0> Some of the trees Thoburn originally planted on the golf-park property.

But the county arborist – a different arborist than the one who initially reviewed Thoburn’s plan – testified that nearly 100 trees were planted in the wrong place and 270 more needed to be planted. The property owner refused to move or add trees and was cited for civil contempt. As a result, he spent 97 days in jail.

Circuit Judge Michael P. McWeeny tired of the stalemate between the two sides and freed Thoburn on May 24. But McWeeny ordered county officials to plant the 270 additional trees and shrubs they required at the range, at a cost of $32,000.

Defenders of Property Rights, a public-interest legal foundation, is representing Thoburn in his appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court of the contempt charge. In particular, lawyers for the group will challenge the fees he has been charged.

“We look forward to having a reviewing court look at what has happened to an innocent landowner in this case,” Nancie Marzulla, the group’s president, stated in a recent press release.

No matter the outcome of the case, Thoburn, or the “Shrubman” as he has been dubbed, has become a hero to property-rights advocates.

“If I can be jailed for not moving trees, do I really possess my property?” asked Thoburn. “There are many ways to take away property rights. My three children are part Cherokee Indian. Their ancestors were forcibly removed from their property on the Trail of Tears. Have we learned anything in America? Are we really more civilized?”

Related offer:

Get an autographed copy of Joseph Farah’s book on property rights, “This Land is Our Land.”

It’s been more than six months since members and friends of the Indianapolis Baptist Temple watched as U.S. marshals seized the church’s sanctuary and surrounding property in February, but the homeless church has forged ahead, growing in both faith and numbers.

WorldNetDaily caught up with Pastor Greg A. Dixon last week and learned that the church continues to persevere despite the loss of its facilities to the IRS. As reported by WND, the seizure took place on Feb. 13, but the story has a much longer history.

The federal government’s actions in IBT’s case sent shock waves through Christian communities across the nation. Many watched on television as Greg J. Dixon, pastor emeritus of the church, was carried out of the sanctuary on a stretcher while his son, current Pastor Greg A. Dixon, walked beside him. U.S. marshals and local police carried other church members out as well, after the property was cordoned off and the agent-in-charge, Marshal Frank Anderson, read the court order confiscating the church for not collecting taxes from its employees.

Rather than paying employment taxes – various withholdings from employee paychecks – church workers paid the taxes as though they were self-employed. But the IRS refunded the taxes and demanded IBT comply with employment law. The church refused, saying it believes churches are not required to answer to a civic government. Indeed, doing so would be a sin against the church’s only authority: Jesus Christ, it argued. After several court appearances, a federal judge ordered its property seized and sold to pay a $6 million tax bill.

Dixon said he learned the church’s 22 acres, which includes a sanctuary capable of seating 2,000, a cafeteria and gymnasium, a baseball diamond, soccer field, maintenance garages, a two-story school building and other structures, was put on the market. The asking price is $3 million, he said, and inquirers are being told the property could use another $3 million in renovations. But so far, according to Dixon, no one wants the property.

After the seizure, media that had covered the 92-day standoff between parishioners and the Justice Department disappeared. But IBT had rekindled a debate as old as the Union: What exactly is the relationship between church and state?

While courts maintain that “generally applicable” laws related to taxation and the withholding of income taxes apply to churches and do not violate First Amendment-protected rights to the free exercise of religion, some circles in Christendom assert that the government has run roughshod over what the founders intended to be a government that is completely hands-off when it comes to churches.

Whatever the conflict’s ultimate solution, IBT learned first-hand that the IRS has the weight – and the guns – of the federal government behind it. Church leadership and members of the congregation have begun to take an even harder look at what constitutes a “church,” said Dixon. IBT made a theological stand in the mid-1980s that resulted in the congregation defining itself as a “New Testament church,” meaning it rejects the concept that it is subject to civic laws of any kind and belongs only to God. Dixon said he and fellow members have made even deeper theological inroads into defining the “church.” It is not a building, he explained, or even any meeting location, but a state of being.

Dixon is scheduled to make a presentation to that effect at a meeting of the Unregistered Baptist Fellowship in October. The organization consists of churches that have not applied for 501c(3) non-profit status with the IRS due to the religious convictions articulated above.

His speech is titled, “How to run a church with no walls.” In it, Dixon hopes to communicate his belief that a permanent church building “can only confuse that true issue of what a New Testament church is,” he told WND. “I’m not sure the church should be a legal entity.”

“The gospel becomes ineffective when buildings become more important than burdens. The gospel is the most important thing,” he added. “God doesn’t live in temples made with hands anymore. He lives in us.”

And IBT is living proof. Parishioners have met over the summer in rented banquet facilities located about 10 miles from their previous church home. In the fall, the congregation will return to the local high-school auditorium it temporarily occupied immediately after the seizure.

IBT’s location-hopping hasn’t seemed to hurt its attendance, according to Dixon, who said three new families joined the church this summer. And though it lacks the comforts of home, church ministry plugs along. On Sunday, nine people will be baptized in a hotel swimming pool, and participation in mid-week home groups has doubled. The number of home groups has grown from the original seven when the program began two years ago to 32 this fall. Such groups, said Dixon, are key to the church’s numerical growth, effective evangelism and fellowship of church members.

Despite the church’s hardships and its belief that it has been wronged by the government, its pastor understands the ordeal cannot constantly be preached from the pulpit. While the church waited for the inevitable arrival of U.S. marshals, Dixon said he applied sermon messages to the standoff. But at some point, he remarked, the church must return to its original mission: evangelism and discipleship.

“We can become so all-consumed with [the IRS conflict] that we forget this is just part of the problem,” he said. “We’ve really tried to keep our ministry balanced.”

That “problem,” says Dixon, is a world operating outside the guidance of Christ, and it is what drives IBT and other churches in their evangelistic ministry. IBT has certainly encountered its share of battles when religious conviction butts heads with civic government, but it has emerged with its mission intact. Not that the battle with the IRS is over – Dixon said the tax bill has now grown to $6.7 million, and he anticipates continued conflict with government officials as they try to collect. But IBT is determined not to let the conflict slow it down.

“I don’t think battles are what hurt the church,” he said. It’s how the church fights the battles that determines its ultimate fate.

Read WorldNetDaily’s comprehensive analysis of the Indianapolis Baptist Temple case

Read Pastor Greg A. Dixon’s commentary on biblical justification of church taxation

Read Joseph Farah’s analysis of IBT’s seizure

The April edition of WorldNet magazine is devoted entirely to an in-depth examination of the income tax, the 16th Amendment and the legal strategies opponents are using to challenge them. Titled “Tax revolt: How Americans are challenging the IRS and the 16th Amendment,” it is available from WND’s online store.

Related stories:

Indianapolis church revisited

Baptist Temple rejects militia’s intervention

Supremes won’t hear Baptist Temple case

Supreme Court meeting on Baptist Temple

In America, if you say you’ve been educated by prot?g?s of the 20th century’s greatest liberal thinkers, people are likely to assume you identify with the American Civil Liberties Union and are an advocate for the benevolence of the state.

But, in fact, liberalism in its purest form, or “classical liberalism,” is the idea that society can run itself with only the bare minimum of government involvement. It is in that spirit that a new university, unique in both its style and substance, is open for business this fall.

YorktownUniversity.com is an Internet-based educational institution offering bachelor degrees in government and managerial economics in the classical liberal tradition. Founded by Richard J. Bishirjian, who holds a doctorate in government and international studies from the University of Notre Dame, the wholly online university is approved by the Virginia State Council of Higher Education to offer college-level courses for degree credit and continuing education.

More than 50 courses are offered in business, economics, fine arts, government, history, literature, philosophy and religious studies. The catalog even lists a nutrition class to satisfy general education requirements. The school operates on a “five-quarter” system, with each “quarter” lasting 10 weeks. While students are allowed to complete courses early, Bishirjian doubts many will, given the academic intensity of each class.

“This is not a degree mill,” he remarked. The school’s motto is, “Putting tradition back into education,” which Bishirjian said means it is putting “standards” back into education.

Most of Yorktown University’s students are aged 35 to 58 and are senior-level management executives, he said. Those attracted to the school usually sign up with the goal of becoming politically active.

The courses are taught by some 47 professors, several of whom have studied under such classical liberal thinkers as Milton Friedman – the famed 1976 Nobel-prize winning economist.

Indeed, the chair of Yorktown University’s managerial economics department is Douglas K. Adie, whose doctoral dissertation at the University of Chicago was supervised by Friedman, as well as George Stigler and Robert Mundell. Stigler and Mundell are also recipients of the Nobel Prize in economics, in 1982 and 1999, respectively.

Gerald Gunderson, American Business and Economic Enterprise professor and director of the Shelby Cullom Davis Endowment at Trinity College in Hartford, Conn., is Yorktown University’s professor of Entrepreneurial History of the U.S. He holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Washington, with a thesis in economic history supervised by Nobel Laureate Douglas North.

Valuation of Assets professor Edmund R. Shanahan holds advanced degrees in modern European history from Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland, in micro and macro economics from the University of London, and in the theory and practice of management from Henley Management College. Currently, Shanahan is an adjunct scholar at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, another home to classical liberalism.

The institute’s namesake, who lived from 1881-1973, dedicated his life’s work to reconstructing “economic theory and method on a sound basis of individual human action and showed that government intervention is always destructive, whether through welfare, inflation, taxation, regulation or war,” according to the institute’s website.

Mises Institute founder and president Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., explained that the term “liberal” is derived from a Latin word meaning “freedom.” Yet in America, modern “liberals” deliberately usurped the term to hide their agenda of statism, Rockwell said.

“It is the mission of the Mises Institute to restore a high place for theory in the social sciences, encourage a revival of critical historical research, promote the free and enterprising commonwealth, and counter the political philosophy of statism in all its forms,” the website continues.

Yorktown University seeks to build upon the works of classical liberals like Mises by teaching its students in the liberal tradition and by employing professors who were trained by some of the philosophy’s greatest thinkers. According to Bishirjian, who also serves as Yorktown’s president, such philosophers, economists and political theorists came to America from Europe during World War II. At that time, such liberal thinking was shunned in countries being overrun by socialism and communism.

Now, America faces a predicament similar to that which forced classical liberals from Europe, Bishirjian indicated. In his letter to prospective students and inquirers on the university’s website, the president outlines his belief that “what passes for education at many of America’s private and state colleges and universities is illiberal education and, thus, inadequate education.”

“Until the rise of the Internet, those seeking to challenge the American education Establishment about these inadequacies would be overwhelmed by barriers to new entrants to the educational marketplace. This is no longer true. By offering specially designed distance learning courses on the Internet, an end-run around current educational culture can be accomplished that founds new, philosophically sound alternatives to university education that reaches anyone in the world with access to the Internet.”

“The Internet offers an opportunity, we believe, to do something about the decline of traditional education and culture, not merely complain. The decline of culture and education are one of a piece, tied together in the overall erosion of moral capital the American people inherited from the Founders of our constitutional order,” his letter continues.

While Bishirjian acknowledges that “great strides” have been made, enabling record numbers of Americans to attend college, the institutions many of those students are entering are subject to massive conflicts of interest: Government-funded schools have an incentive to produce government-loving citizens.

“These academic institutions have become places where religious, moral and, significantly, academic standards have been watered down and are in retreat,” he added.

Additionally, while a college degree has become an occupational necessity for white-collar employment, the cost of obtaining that degree has risen dramatically. In reaction to the staggering costs of education, Yorktown University offers its courses for $299 each. Because the school is Internet-based and does not need to maintain a campus, it is able to charge the low price, while traditional universities charge hundreds, even thousands of dollars per course.

Yorktown University’s classrooms are electronic and are maintained through the use of “Blackboard” – a sophisticated software employed by 1,700 other schools, said Bishirjian. The software was put to the test this summer when the university offered 13 courses beginning in June. But the school’s real beginning was Aug. 20, when its 25 students ventured into the fall quarter.

While its enrollment may sound small compared to traditional universities, Yorktown’s numbers are comparable to the start-up statistics of other correspondence schools, Bishirjian noted.

One such school is Jones International University. Founded in 1995 by the cable industry’s Glenn R. Jones of the former Jones Intercable, JIU went “virtual” in 1999. It offers both bachelor’s and master’s degrees in business communication, seven different master’s of business administration and six master’s in education degrees.

Now based solely on the Internet, JIU is self-described as the “first fully online university to receive United States regional accreditation.” The school is accredited by the Higher Learning Commission, a member of the North Central Association, an accrediting body for institutions of higher education in the United States.

When asked if Yorktown University will seek regional accreditation, Bishirjian replied, “Accreditation gives you one thing: government assistance.” His institution will rely on the influence of its distinguished faculty when Yorktown University graduates seek acceptance to graduate school, he said. Most graduate schools in the United States require applicants to hold undergraduate degrees from regional accredited schools.

While JIU did not respond to inquiries about its enrollment, the school’s website references a recent Merrill Lynch report on distance-learning courses. By 2002, the report claims, the number of students in such courses will reach 2.2 million – up from 710,000 in 1998. Those numbers include distance-learning courses offered by traditional universities.

Though the concept of a wholly Internet-based educational institution is new, “bricks-and-mortar” universities began offering such courses several years ago. The popularity of such programs is growing rapidly, as evidenced by the Merrill Lynch report.

Yorktown University expects to benefit from the growing popularity of Web-based education as well. Bishirjian said he anticipates enrollment to reach 200 by October 2002.

As Americans consider recent medical discoveries pertaining to stem-cell research and the ethical and political issues surrounding it, conversations on the news, around water coolers and even at dinner tables have begun including such complex terms as “DNA abnormalities,” “cell differentiation” and “somatic cell nuclear transfer.”

Even President George W. Bush joined the conversation this month when he entered living rooms around the nation via television to outline his decision on the controversial issue of embryonic stem-cell research. The federal government will fund research of the approximately 60 existing stem-cell lines created by privately funded scientists.

Americans are told stem-cell research holds great promise for the curing of such debilitating and life-threatening diseases as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s. But how? Just what are stem cells? Where do they come from, and how do scientists think they can help improve medical treatments?

In basic terms, a stem cell is one that can be formed into virtually any human cell found in the body. To understand the origin of the cells, a review of human development is necessary.

Human life is created when an ovum – the egg from a female – is fertilized by a sperm. When joined, the two “gametes” create a single-cell organism that eventually develops into a baby. The fertilized egg is “totipotent,” meaning its potential is total. The single cell splits within hours of fertilization, forming two identical totipotent cells. Either of these cells has the potential to become a fully developed baby. Indeed, identical twins are formed from two totipotent cells that develop separately into genetically identical individuals. Click here to see a diagram of the basic development of a human, courtesy of the National Institutes of Health.

After several days of continued cell division, the totipotent cells begin to “differentiate,” or specialize. An outer, hollow sphere of cells encompasses a cluster of cells inside, known as the “inner-cell mass.” Together, the cells are known as a “blastocyst.” The blastocyst’s outer layer of cells will go on to become the placenta and other tissues necessary in nurturing the growth of a human baby. The cells comprising the inner-cell mass can form virtually every type of cell found in the human body, but they are unable to fully develop into a baby without the outer layer. If pluripotent cells alone were implanted into a woman’s uterus, they would not form into a baby. Because of this, the inner-cell mass cells are not totipotent, but rather are called “pluripotent.”

Over time and more cell division, pluripotent cells continue to differentiate, forming into cells that perform specific functions. These specialized cells are called “multipotent.” While the inner-cell mass cells of a blastocyst go on to become various organs, nerves and tissues, some of the multipotent cells always remain as they are to create replacement cells for their specific functions. They can be found in children and adults. For example, blood multipotent cells continually replenish the body’s blood supply. While multipotent cells have been found in various areas of adults, they have not yet been found for all human tissues, but progress is being made, according to the National Institutes of Health. This diagram from NIH shows the progress of totipotent cells to multipotent cells.

Pluripotent and multipotent cells are both refereed to as “stem cells” and are the subject of controversial research making headlines.

Because pluripotent stem cells – the precursors to multipotent stem cells – eventually develop into nearly all the cells required by humans, scientists say they have great medical-treatment applications. Through various experiments with animals, scientists have shown they can direct the specialization of pluripotent stem cells. In other words, the cells can be manipulated into virtually any specialized cell.

The process of manipulating stem cells into more specialized cells has many potential medical applications. According to the NIH, simply studying the cells’ development can aid in understanding certain genetic diseases.

“A primary goal of this work would be the identification of the factors involved in the cellular decision-making process that results in cell specialization,” the NIH explains. “We know that turning genes on and off is central to this process, but we do not know much about these ‘decision-making’ genes or what turns them on or off. Some of our most serious medical conditions, such as cancer and birth defects, are due to abnormal cell specialization and cell division. A better understanding of normal cell processes will allow us to further delineate the fundamental errors that cause these often deadly illnesses.”

But the most hoped-for application of stem-cell research by advocates of the practice is the creation of cures to various diseases. By directing the specialization of pluripotent stem cells, scientists hope to create “cell therapies.”

“Many diseases and disorders result from disruption of cellular function or destruction of tissues of the body. Today, donated organs and tissues are often used to replace ailing or destroyed tissue. Unfortunately, the number of people suffering from these disorders far outstrips the number of organs available for transplantation. Pluripotent stem cells, stimulated to develop into specialized cells, offer the possibility of a renewable source of replacement cells and tissue to treat a myriad of diseases, conditions, and disabilities including Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, spinal cord injury, stroke, burns, heart disease, diabetes, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. There is almost no realm of medicine that might not be touched by this innovation,” the NIH states.

But how are stem cells obtained? As stated earlier, multipotent stem cells can be found in children and adults. The NIH says multipotent stem cells have not been found for all types of adult tissue, but more discoveries are being made. Others claim adult stem cells are not the best specimens from which to create stem-cell lines because the cells have aged and may have suffered damage.

Such scientists advocate pluripotent stem-cell research. But those cells can only be found in a developing embryo, which is where the cells are created. To obtain the cells, left-over embryos from in-vitro fertilization clinics are used. A blastocyst’s outer- and inner-cell layers are separated, destroying the embryo.

Many arguments exist on both sides of the embryonic stem-cell research debate. Because the process of obtaining the cells destroys a human embryo, many oppose the research. Others counter that the embryos were destined to be destroyed anyway, since they are “leftovers” from a couple’s efforts to become pregnant.

At a recent congressional hearing on stem-cell research, two couples asked members of the joint committee to consider alternative fates for leftover IVF embryos. The couples brought their children, who were adopted as embryos and implanted into the women’s uteruses, enabling infertile women to carry and give birth to their adopted children.

But proponents of embryonic stem-cell research say adoption of that sort is a rarity and that the potential benefits from the research outweighs any moral objections to destroying leftover embryos. Besides, some argue, the embryo is only the potential for human life and is not actual human yet.

To those who believe life begins at conception, destruction of a fertilized human egg at any stage of the growth process is immoral. And that immoral action cannot be mitigated by any potential good that may come from the research.

There is a third method of obtaining stem cells: from aborted fetuses. Cells from an aborted fetus’s reproductive tissues have been manipulated by scientists, producing the same result as experiments on pluripotent stem cells. But this method of obtaining research material is objectionable to abortion opponents.

True, the fetus is already dead when the cell extraction takes place, but the method of the baby’s death is still immoral – even evil. Participating in research that uses aborted fetal tissue is, by association, participating in evil, they argue.

Questionable ethics is exactly what research proponents say they are trying to avoid through federal funding and regulation of the experiments. By funding the research, the U.S. government will be in a position to control the way the research is conducted. However, privately-funded scientists will not be affected by government restrictions, unless the restrictions are made law for the general public.

In its recommendations to former President Bill Clinton, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission outlined what it believed should be the future of embryonic stem-cell research. The commission expressed its belief that government should prohibit the creation of embryos specifically for research purposes. Established by a Clinton-signed executive order in 1995, the panel made a total of 13 recommendations in its 1999 report.

As stem-cell research progresses – now with federal funding – more is being learned about adult stem cells. Scientists in Seattle, Wash., and Milan, Italy, discovered in 1999 that adult neural stem cells in mice had the ability to de-differentiate and could then be manipulated into other cells. While results with human cells has been more limited, according to the NIH, successful development of the research could eliminate the need for fetal cells in stem-cell experiments.

The California Coastal Commission, an agency recently declared unconstitutional by a superior court judge, has delayed a Santa Cruz church’s request to expand its parking lot – a move church monks say stems from the community’s “anti-religious sentiments.”

Run by the Oblates of St. Joseph, a Roman Catholic religious congregation founded in northern Italy in 1878, the church is a shrine dedicated to St. Joseph. Officially titled by the Catholic Church as the “Shrine of St. Joseph, Guardian of the Redeemer,” the shrine was founded “to serve the interests of Jesus Christ in the spirit and model of St. Joseph, who, as husband of Mary and earthly guardian of Jesus, humbly and quietly did the Lord’s work and faithfully served Jesus as guardian and protector,” according to legal documents filed by the oblates.

The shrine’s history begins in 1931, when oblate missionaries from Italy came to California, working up and down the state attending to Catholic immigrants – largely Italian, but also Mexican and Filipino – in need of clergy to serve them with cultural sensitivity. In 1933, the oblates purchased the current provincial house, which initially served as a school, a chapel and a residence for seminarians, as well as for oblate priests and brothers.

The oblates originally chose its ocean-view property because they believe the site’s natural beauty can serve as a place to encounter God. Maintaining the natural beauty of the property as a place of prayer, solitude and reflection open to all people in search of an encounter with God is an important priority for the oblates, according to their lawyer, James Sweeney.

In 1949, a benefactor deeded an adjacent parcel of property to the oblates. There the shrine was built, along with educational facilities. The latter building was eventually leased to a private secular grammar school in 1990. Rent from the school enables the oblates to continue their religious mission, to operate their shrine ministry in Santa Cruz and to provide material necessities for the oblate seminarians, novices, priests and brothers.

In late 1992, the oblates remodeled the shrine. The renovated building was constructed in a manner to permit future expansion, permitting the seating of additional visitors and “pilgrims” – Catholic faithful from parishes throughout the world who visit the shrine’s inspiring environment. Consistent with the shrine’s canonical status, officially bestowed in 1993, the Bishop of Monterey has granted the oblate community permission to celebrate Holy Eucharist once per day at the shrine. Eucharist may be celebrated more than once per day only during times of novenas or special pilgrimages.

Since residential developments have grown around the shrine, a relatively small but vocal group has convinced the City of Santa Cruz to set up no-parking zones on public streets adjacent to the oblates’ property. As a result, access to the shrine, its grounds and the school has been restricted. Additionally, protesters successfully lobbied to prohibit parents from dropping off students at the main entrance of the school building, an entrance that had been in continuous use since 1961, causing the city to require that students be dropped off on the shrine grounds and cross the shrine property to access the school. Similar campaigns, mounted by the same core group, have also resulted in a curtailing of the use of the shrine bells to call worshippers to prayer and Mass, as well as the closure of a staff parking lot adjacent to the school building.

In 1998, the oblates decided to expand the existing parking lot from 100 spaces to 147, using a vacant lot adjacent to the shrine building. The design would route the limited traffic and noise away from the shrine grounds. After several months of study and plan preparation, the oblates presented a formal plan to the city’s zoning board in late 1998. Finally, the zoning board approved the oblates’ plan on Oct. 26, 2000, modifying it to provide just 32 additional parking spaces.

According to Sweeney, objections were continually raised by opponents throughout the process.

“When one objection was shown to be meritless, a ready replacement was concocted to take its place,” he wrote in a brief to the Coastal Commission. “First, the objectors complained that the possible presence of a red-tailed hawk would preclude any expansion of the shrine parking area. When that objection was determined to be baseless, the objectors complained that the expansion might interfere with the nesting of a peregrine falcon on the property. When it was determined by ornithologists that there wasn’t a single peregrine falcon anywhere near the shrine property, the objectors came up with yet another objection: The parking lot expansion might impact the over-wintering areas of the monarch butterfly. Despite the fact that the butterflies’ eucalyptus tree winter habitat is more than 300 feet from the shrine property, that the habitat itself is located in a 36-acre open-field State park replete with nectaring sources, and that the shrine property is surrounded by residential housing and paved streets, the objectors pressed this likewise baseless objection in the local press and before the City Council.”

But the City Council eventually rejected the protesters’ arguments and agreed with the zoning board to allow the parking-lot expansion. However, the expansion was reduced to just 17 additional spaces.

Not satisfied with the city’s decision, the Sierra Club appealed to the Coastal Commission – a quasi-judicial body of 12 members appointed by the governor and each house of the legislature. Currently, both the legislature and the executive are run by Democrats.

At a July 12 hearing, the commission’s staff issued a report, concluding the commission lacked jurisdiction in the matter. The report was supported by a representative of the city’s planning department, who had appeared at the hearing. But when the commission opened the hearing for public comment, several individuals spoke in opposition to the oblates’ plan. One protester cried over a tray of dead monarch butterflies and castigated the oblates as religious hypocrites who have routinely lied about their “true agenda.”

At the close of public comments, one of the commissioners expressed concern that perhaps more study of butterfly wintering habits was in order, as environmentalist speakers had urged. In response, the planning department representative reminded the commission that two such studies had already been conducted, and both found the parking lot would have no impact on the butterfly habitat. Commission staff also indicated that the commission’s own biologist had personally visited the project site and independently reached the same conclusion. Nevertheless, a new study was ordered, and no date was set for its deadline.

Rev. Philip Massetti, provincial of the oblates, is exasperated with the process.

“The environmental concerns raised by our opponents are unfounded, as the scientists – who have studied their claims – have repeatedly reaffirmed. I believe that the anti-religious sentiments and biases of a small but very vocal group of local activists is driving this entire process,” he said. “For the past two and a half years, we have been trying to negotiate with these people, but it seems that they are not satisfied with anything we offer. It seems that they are using any means available to delay our project and obstruct our ministry. That is why we will probably need to seek recourse under the Constitution.”

That recourse is likely to be a lawsuit alleging the oblates’ First Amendment right to freedom of religious expression is being violated. Additionally, the monks may sue the Coastal Commission under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, said Sweeney.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA, requires cities to demonstrate a compelling state interest for any substantial burden they place upon any church’s usage of its property. It also prohibits selective discrimination against churches regarding zoning policies. Only a year old, the law is being tested by inmates, churches and religious institutions, all asserting government has hindered the practice of their faith.

Any lawsuit filed against the commission by the oblates will likely include reference to a recent superior court ruling in which Judge Charles C. Kobayashi declared the Coastal Commission an unconstitutional agency. Since eight of the 12 members are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the legislature, the commission violates constitutionally stipulated separation of powers.

Kobayashi’s ruling does not suggest any remedies, and the commission has appealed the decision. If the ruling is upheld, the commission could be dismantled or restructured. Commission Chairperson Sara Won believes the agency will survive, though its structure may change slightly. But a revised framework for the panel would not have changed the commission’s decision in the oblates’ case, she said.

Asked if she agrees with the ruling, Won replied, “Absolutely not.” Should the ruling be upheld, the commission “will be less independent,” she said. “No one elected official controls us,” Won continued, arguing that makes the commission less political than it otherwise would be. “You don’t want outside interference.”

The Coastal Commission was originally created by voter initiative in 1972. But within a few years, the legislature made the commission permanent.

Responding to critics who say the Democrat-dominated commission is heavy handed in its environmental activism, Won replied, “Everything we do is subject to challenge in the courts.” Besides, she added, the Democratic Party has a variety of views represented. “Here you had a tie vote, and we’re all Democrats,” she said through chuckles.

Won believes the commission is not to blame for any delay to the oblates’ expansion project. She said it will be a “shame” if the commission-initiated study shows no impact on the monarch’s habitat, since the study would only have delayed the church’s expansion. However, she placed the onus of that shame on the oblates, saying if they had conducted a study in accordance with the requirements in the local coastal plan, a new study would not have been necessary.

Won and four other commissioners voted against performing the study, and an equal number of votes were cast in favor of it. The motion was not to take jurisdiction of the matter and therefore allow the expansion to take place as last approved by the City Council. But the tie vote caused the motion to fail, meaning the commission took jurisdiction of the matter and ordered the study.

A new study was necessary, said Won, because the ones presented at the hearing by the oblates and the commission’s own staff were not conducted in accordance with the city’s local coastal plan.

After saying several times that she did not remember the details of the issue, Won said she based her vote against the study on testimony from the commission’s biologist, who said he did not believe a parking-lot expansion would affect the butterflies’ winter habitat.

“Even though I didn’t vote with them (commissioners who supported the study), I did agree with them that proper procedure had not been followed,” Won said. “I agree that technically, there needed to be a study because the local coastal plan required one, and they hadn’t done it.”

But observers who support the oblates believe the commission has alternate motives for ordering the study. Massetti is frustrated with government’s response to the oblates’ situation and fears protesters are trying to oust the religious community from the neighborhood.

“I believe this case is about religious freedom and the ability of our congregation to use our Shrine property for religious purposes. If people wanting to visit the Shrine cannot park, or cannot enjoy a quiet environment for prayer, worship and contemplation, we cannot serve them. This is our ministry. I believe those few people who oppose our efforts want us out of the neighborhood. I am afraid it is because we are a religious group that holds views and values that are considered antiquated and objectionable by those in a position of authority, so they use the monarch butterfly as a political wedge issue that musters political support against us.”

Related stories:

Religious-rights suit gets city’s response

DOJ intervenes in religious-rights case

Church sues city over land-use permit

Churches sue for zoning rights

Christian college to sue over zoning

The City of Lake Elsinore, while challenging the constitutionality of a federal religious-rights law, said even if the law is upheld, the city was within its rights to prevent a church from occupying its prospective new property.

As previously reported by WorldNetDaily, Elsinore Christian Center sued the City of Lake Elsinore after the church’s conditional-use permit (CUP) was denied, preventing the church from moving into property it has in escrow. The lawsuit is based on a year-old federal law that holds local governments to the highest legal standard when evaluating land-use permits for religious organizations.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, or RLUIPA, requires cities to demonstrate a compelling state interest for any substantial burden they place upon any church’s usage of its property. It also prohibits selective discrimination against churches regarding zoning policies. The act states:

No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly or institution (A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.

Elsinore Christian Center purchased a grocery store in the city’s downtown area, to which it plans to move. The move is necessary, the church claims, because its current parking and facilities are inadequate. That inconvenience has caused some to leave the church, including elderly and disabled parishioners who require close parking. Escrow will close on the property as soon as the church is granted a CUP. But the city denied the permit, saying the grocery store is a necessary element in preventing a blighted area from worsening – a “compelling governmental interest.”

The city also believes RLUIPA is unconstitutional. Were the city automatically to allow churches to move into any city zone, it would be excessively entangling government with religion, since similar non-religious organizations are required to abide by land-use policies. Such entanglement would violate the Establishment clause of the Constitution, the city claims.

Elsinore Christian Center believes the administrative land-use procedures it is forced to undergo to occupy its new site, namely the requirement of a CUP, is a “substantial burden” on its free exercise of religion.

Additionally, the church “sincerely believes that it is called to worship and evangelize downtown Lake Elsinore from the parcel disputed in this case,” wrote the church’s attorney Robert Tyler of the Pacific Justice Institute.

The church cites a specific provision of RLUIPA, which states, “The use, building, or conversion of real property for the purpose of religious exercise shall be considered to be religious exercise of the person or entity that uses or intends to use the property for that purpose.”

In its application of the law to this case, the church believes that since it was prevented by the city from occupying the grocery store, the city violated RLUIPA.

But in a court document, the city outlines its argument to the contrary.

“The City’s denial of the CUP to the [church] has not ‘substantially’ burdened its religious exercise. The congregation of the Church continues to practice its religious and missionary services at its current downtown location and denial of the relief sought will simply result in continuing to do so. The inability of some of its members to easily attend church services and events, given the limitations on parking, can easily be remedied by a van or a taxi service provided by the church to its disabled members,” the document states.

Assistant City Attorney John McClendon said the church’s interpretation of RLUIPA would allow cities to set up “church zones” in which churches would be allowed to move in as a matter of right, without having to go through the CUP process. Currently, churches may move into any zone with a CUP, unlike non-religious organizations, which are restricted to appropriate zones. (For example, a retail establishment is not allowed to move into a residential neighborhood.) Setting up a “church zone,” the attorney argued, could actually be harmful to churches.

“We don’t want to ghetto-ize churches,” he said.

McClendon, who as a Christian is sympathetic to churches and wishes Elsinore Christian Center no ill will, believes RLUIPA faces similar constitutional problems as an older and now-defunct federal law did several years ago.

RLUIPA is intended to replace the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, or RFRA, which was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1997 as unconstitutional because it attempted to tell the federal courts how they must interpret and apply the First Amendment when scrutinizing state and local laws. RFRA violated the separation of powers set forth in the Constitution. Critics of RLUIPA say the new law may be struck down for the same reason.

“I’m not convinced Congress solved all the constitutional problems of RFRA,” he said.

Even if the statute is upheld, the city was well within the boundaries of the law when it denied the church’s CUP, McClendon continued. The church has ignored a key element in the case – the grocery store it wishes to occupy sits in a redevelopment area.

Local governments across the United States set up redevelopment agencies that seek out impoverished or unused areas, declare them “blighted,” acquire them through eminent domain and use federal funds to improve economic development. The property in question is located in such an area.

Under California redevelopment law, a building and its use cannot be changed if it lies in a redevelopment area unless the property’s new owner gets permission from the redevelopment agency of jurisdiction. Neither the church nor the grocery store’s current owner have complied with the regulations, according to McClendon.

The grocery store is the only one in the blighted neighborhood, the attorney said. If it were eliminated, blight would only be worsened as residents of the low-income neighborhood, many of whom do not own cars, would be forced to shop at markets several miles away. Additionally, the 10 people employed by the market would lose their jobs, further depressing the area’s economic status.

Prevention of blight is a compelling government interest, argues McClendon. So even if the court finds the church has suffered a substantial burden, the city has not overstepped the boundaries of RLUIPA, he said.

The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a motion to intervene in the case to defend RLUIPA’s constitutionality. As the nation’s attorney, it is Attorney General John Ashcroft’s job to defend federal laws. Accordingly, a Justice Department attorney from Washington, D.C., made the trip to California for a recent hearing in the case, which began in May.

Attorneys for the DOJ claim RLUIPA passes the “Lemon test,” which was created by the Supreme Court in 1971 to evaluate Establishment Clause challenges. The three-pronged test, outlined in Lemon v. Kurtzman, requires any accommodation law to have “a secular legislative purpose” and a “principal or primary effect” that “neither advances nor inhibits religion.” Also, the law must not “foster an excessive government entanglement with religion.”

Several lawsuits have been filed under RLUIPA by churches and other religious organizations since the law was enacted. The first case decided in favor of a religious institution under the statute was on Dec. 20, when a U.S. district judge in Michigan agreed that the Haven Shores Community Church could occupy storefront property. The church had been holding Sunday services temporarily at a local high school while seeking a permanent home. Haven Shores signed a lease for the property at the end of May 1999. But when Rev. David Bailey went in to apply for a building permit to modify the space, he was told by city officials that religious meetings and worship were not permitted at that location under city zoning laws.

In fact, Grand Haven’s zoning ordinance for the “B-1 Community Business District” specifically allows “private clubs,” “fraternal organizations,” “lodge halls,” “funeral homes,” “theaters,” and “assembly halls, concert halls or similar places of public assembly.”

Bailey tried every available avenue in an attempt to persuade the city that a church was obviously a “place of public assembly” that could occupy property in the B-1 district, but his arguments were rejected by the Office of Public Safety, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Planning Commission and finally, the City Council. The Becket Fund successfully represented the church in its RLUIPA lawsuit against the city.

Related stories:

DOJ intervenes in religious-rights case

Church sues city over land-use permit

Churches sue for zoning rights

Christian college to sue over zoning