Court says libraries can bar worship

[deadparrot]

SAN FRANCISCO - Government libraries can block religious groups from worshipping in public meeting rooms, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

The decision came from a case involving the Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries, a Christian group which won a court order allowing them to hold a "prayer, praise and worship" service in meeting rooms open to other groups at a Contra Costa County library branch. A federal judge said it had a First Amendment right of religion to use the public's facilities.

But a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that ruling in a 2-1 decision.

"Prohibiting Faith Center's religious worship services from the Antioch meeting room is a permissible exclusion of a category of speech," Judge Richard Paez ruled.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_us/library_prayers

[crikkett]

1. Ssssshhhhhh!

:rofl:

[skooooo]

2. People encouraged to THINK in libraries....

...not have an emotion-fest.

[Jim Stark]

11. excuse me....

umm, so people who are Christians or any other religion do not think but only FEEL about their religion?
Wow, that's a lot of intelligent people who don't ever THINK.

[kestrel91316]

32. Worship belongs in churches, not public libraries.

Some reason the public (who funds the library) shouldn't have a say in this??? You would prefer government interference? Use of force to impose religion on the unwilling?

Welcome to DU. Enjoy your stay.

[LiberalFighter]

35. If they don't have their own worship place...

they have other options.

RENTING from a business at a reduce rate if the business finds it suitable.
Obtaining the use from a business at no cost when the facility is not in use.

Utilizing the home of a member if they are a small congregation. (I recall that when the church that I use to attend first organized they met in a home that was later turned into a parsonage. When we moved into the area the services were held either downstairs in the basement or upstairs where the choir practiced and younger kids had their classes during the week. The church wasn't built for many years later.)

Before our time many times worship was conducted in the homes of a congregant and was rotated. Just as the minister preached to more than one congregation miles apart.

If their membership and attendance is high enough then they should be able to pay the rent of a facility. They have no right to receive the use of any building for the purpose of worship just because they want to practice their religion. And they should not be given favoritism over other churches that went through the same thing and perservered without assistance. A church is only as strong as the congregation that is committed to their belief.

If they have a attendance of at least 30 households they should take in over $2000 a week.

A library is not the best location for any type of religious worship. The meeting rooms are best suited for small groups that meet irregularly and are not proned to extended and/or loud noise. Singing would fall into both of those categories. Congregations and choirs never sing quietly!

[fshrink]

34. Yep. Pretty much.

[KAZ]

37. Uh, yes. What's your point? It's called faith. n/t

n/t

[VegasWolf]

12. See, they can pray to sky people and the go to the Science Fiction

section to see if their prayers were answered. Brilliant!

[Anakin Skywalker]

41. Duplicate Posting

[NMDemDist2]

3. as long as they aren't proselytizing I don't see why they can't rent the

room

I'm thinking there is more to this story. Why would the facilities managers have a problem with it? I think something is not being reported here.....

[MissMillie]

4. Yep... there's more to it than it just being a church

it's possible these services have been disruptive in the past. That would certainly mean that they shouldn't be there. It is a library, after all.

[sui generis]

5. Because if it's being used for a prayer meetin'

it can't be used for a town hall meeting, and if it's booked five nights a week by someone who is using the library as a church it's an abuse of the system.

I suspect there's more to the story than evil atheists trying to keep good godfearin' folk from fearing god. Plus, it's public property funded by the taxpayer's dollar - these prayer groups need to go to jesus camp or something if they want to to pray that badly.

[wakeme2008]

6. For one the room is Free

"The county's policy allows the public to use free meeting rooms at its libraries, "

[VegasWolf]

14. Free meeting room means greater tithe return on investment! nt

[sweetheart]

7. Yes, its a first amendment thing, the ability to meet up in like conscienc

the right of the people peaceably to assemble When all space is privatized, then the
right to assemble is at question, and if the only public meeting rooms around (generally as
is the case with libraries), the rest meeting spaces private venues of one sort or another,
then no space is held sacrosanct.

I have used library rooms for group meditations, when one religion is banned, then they
all are, on principal, without some other dirt, this decision is horrible.

[greccogirl]

19. Yes, it is horrible.

[Wretched Refuse]

49. the right of the people peaceably to assemble

Uh that is to redress the government. Not have the gov provide shelter for them.
No religions get to use the libraries. Good Idea. If some of the more quieter ones are pissed off let them get pissed off at the other religions. And since when is meditation a religion? That is akin to saying that having a cooking lecture is religion, becasue some people just live to eat. Puhleeze.

[transeo]

22. If they want to worship they should use their church facilities

NOT a publicly funded building. Separation of church and state. Plain and simple.

[LostinVA]

26. That's how I see it, too

[sweetheart]

33. The first amendment is about freedom to meet up

You don't make exceptions about religions, plain and simple.

Lots of religions are more organic prayer groups without big
church facilites or any church facilities for that matter,
and if you want to rent a room to discuss politics it is your right,
and if i want to rent a public room to meditate in with my friends, it is my right.

You grossly misframe the separation of church and state.

[KansDem]

23. Many libraries make meeting rooms available to the public at no charge

The only groups who "rent" rooms are for-profit corporations. Therefore, the problem of allowing religious groups to use the rooms has to do with whether or not the public should pay for it.

Personally, I don't have a problem with this, as long as proselytizing isn't going on...

[Tracer]

8. I live in a town that not only has a big library, but ...

... has at least 20 churches of all denominations.

And from what I can see, they are empty 95% of the time (Saturdays and Sundays being the exception).

I'll bet this is the case in Contra Costa also.

With all that space going empty, what is the problem with having their religious worship services in a CHURCH?!?

[Wretched Refuse]

50. Or conversely...

Maybe we should FORCE them to have to RENT their empty spaces to other groups who they may or may not like. Hmmm SOunds OK by me. Our Lady of perpectual guilt now has to have the KKK meeting.

[Mudoria]

62. I imagine when

public dollars are spent to build those churches then you might have a case for forcing someone to "rent" that space to the KKK or Socialist Workers Party. Till that happens though I guess it remains private property.

[Charlie Brown]

9. Here's the opinion

"Faith Center vs. Glover"

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/Opinions+by+date?OpenView&Start=1&Count=100&Expand=1.1

I advise everyone to read it or at least skim through it before weighing in and taking a side. There are good points. One that the press seems to be ignoring is that the church can still use the meeting rooms, as long as it's not exclusively for worshiping activities (they can still hold study groups or prayer meetings).

[VegasWolf]

16. dupe

[greccogirl]

20. What is the difference between

a "prayer group" and a "Worship meeting" and why should any judge be allowed to decide that?

[KAZ]

38. I would guess because....

.. THAT'S OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Got a problem with the 3 branches?

[greccogirl]

43. Of course not.

But I DO have a problem with discrimination, which I believe this is. I will interested to see if it is appealed.

[transeo]

68. How is it discrimination?

If all religions are banned from worshipping in a taxpayer funded location, how is it discrimination? They ARE allowed to use the space for acceptable purposes, just like anyone else. No religious group is allowed to use the room for that purposes.

[Charlie Brown]

52. the difference is a worship meeting is far more likely to disturb patrons

and it transforms the library into something it was never meant to be, a church, on the public dime. It's all stated very eloquently in the opinion.

[transeo]

67. Why should either be done at taxpayer expense?

That is the root of this issue. The public library and their meeting rooms are funded by taxpayers. Churches are expempt from taxation. They do not pay for library services or use of the meeting rooms. Thus, they cannot hold worship/prayer sessions in the room. If they wanted to hold a community forum to educate ABOUT their religion, that would be fine. Worship and prayer however is of no benefit to the general public and taxpayers at large. That's what churches are for.

[noonwitch]

10. We had a church that rented our high school out on Sundays

It worked out pretty well for both sides. The school had the kind of space they needed, and the rent money went to buy needed items for the classrooms.

[carolinayellowdog]

13. Time, space and noise factors

I've had to deal with a similar problem, a religious group that entered under false pretenses saying they were not having worship services when they were. The noise factor would be a big problem for any typical evangelical worship service, which would be disruptive during hours the library is open. Some libraries make their meeting rooms available when the library is closed, having separate entrances etc. But even in such a case, *regular* worship services are problematic for an obvious reason. If they wanted the space for a single event, not a problem; but anyone who wants to book the meeting room at the same time and day every week from here to eternity is thereby monopolizing a publicly owned facility for a private enterprise. And my guess is that this is exactly what the church in question thought was their right.

[w4rma]

15. Yeah, but why would a library want to block them except in some extreme

circumstances?

[VegasWolf]

17. There is always the danger the Evangelicals will lose their rattlesnakes.

[greccogirl]

18. This is wrong. They should be allowed to rent the room

as long as any other group is.

[transeo]

21. It's called separation of church and state

I used to work at the second largest public library system in the counrty. The libraries are public property and by allowing a religious group to use public facilities for worship activities is tantamount to the government endorsing that religion. Most library systems have rules against public meeting rooms being used for religious purposes. Additionally, any meeting in those rooms has to be completely open to all members of the public, not just a particular group of people or religious sect. We all know how welcoming most religious institutions are of those who disagree with them. ;-P This is a perfectly sound ruling.

[greccogirl]

44. Except that these situations have been

ruled on before. If other groups are allowed religious groups cannot be denied. I believe that was the case on rulings involving church groups meeting after school.
This is much the same thing. The rentals are either open to all or they are not.
No one in the library is being forced to do anything.

[transeo]

58. They ARE allowed to use the room!

They just can't use it for WORSHIP. If they want to use the room for a legitimate public meeting, they are allowed to.

[KansDem]

24. Where does it say "rent" in the article?

I don't find the word "rent." If this group could rent the room, it would be a different matter. But, the question is, should a religious group use a room at taxpayer expense.

If the word "rent" is in the article, please let me know. I don't see it...

[carolinayellowdog]

30. No one is preventing them from using the room

just like any other group. They are being prevented from carrying out an *activity* that *no* other group is allowed to do.

[greccogirl]

45. Why?

[Nevernose]

57. I believe it's based on the "bible club in school" decision

A school back East banned Bible Clubs from schools a few years back, and the ACLU fought to have it allowed. The argument was something as follows: if one kind of club is allowed, then all clubs must be allowed. Actually holding services, beyond a club-type activity such as bible study (more apporpriate for a library than almost anywhere else) or even a prayer group (group = club), is akin to sponsoring a religion. It's also akin to letting a business operate for free inside the library, even if it is a non-profit business.

The SCOTUS has ruled on this particular issue several times, always the same.

The actual court decision is linked above, however.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

27. oh boy

[KAZ]

39. Button. Lower left. n/t

n/t

[LeftyMom]

28. Good. Libraries promote thinking, churches make it a sin.

Let me tell you, if I'm ever studying and interupted by the boisterous babble of bible bangers, not even jesus will save somebody from an OED to the head.

PS The bible says to meet in the homes of fellow believers. Get out of the danged library, sell your building, feed the poor like your god told you to and meet up on sister suzie's couch like you're supposed to. It's hard to take you people seriously if you don't folow your own god's rules.

[OregonDem]

29. I don't have a problem if they rent it, since there are costs to use it

However the costs should be the same for every group and no group can be excluded. If there are no cost to use public property then they could use it for religious purposes for free, for example a person passing out bibles in a city park. I only have a problem with church/state issues if the state is promoting a faith, for example a tax payer paid teacher leading prayers or teaching creationism, or the state posting the ten commandments on public property, passing laws saying that we are a Christian Nation ect. Personally I think all religion is bs but I strongly support peoples right to practice it. In the end with freedom to access information and the freedom of speech and a separation of church and state I believe reason will prevail. Its only a matter of time.

[greccogirl]

46. I totally agree.

If the rooms are rented then no groups should be excluded, period.

[transeo]

69. There is NO RENT involved and the church is not excluded from using it

The room is payed for through taxes and available for free to people who want to hold open-to-the-public meetings. Religious worship of all kinds is prohibited activity. This group is allowed to use the room, but not for worship. Why is this so difficult for people to understand? It's a very simple concept - taxpayer dollars are not allowed to fund religious worship. Also churches do not pay taxes, thus they have not payed for use of the library services.

[nealmhughes]

31. Well, I am a librarian, an academic librarian, not a "have you got the new

Ann Coulter in yet?" type. (Just a little jab at my colleagues at public libraries, goodnatured professional humor, I assure all.)

But snootiness aside, quite frankly, the prime concern of libraries should be a legal, Constitutional POLICY that is rigidly enforced. If they are in compliance with Contra Costa's policies, and general policies regarding noise, etc. then it is discriminatory to single out a religious group when other social/political groups are allowed to meet in the public meeting rooms.

If a group such as the Bahais world peace group of the Greater Bay Area wished to meet, or the John Birch Society's annual hatefest conspiracy awards ceremony or the set up meeing of the Camp Fire Kids of CC County should they if they meet the policies? The problem would result in ABUSE of the facilities and monopolizing the space by having a standing appointment, not in use per se, in my professional opinion. But what do I know, I'm just a librarian...

Has the group considered renting a synagogue? They don't get much use on Sundays, I hear!

[VegasWolf]

36. I like the way you think!! Cheers!!! nt

[greccogirl]

47. I agree -

But snootiness aside, quite frankly, the prime concern of libraries should be a legal, Constitutional POLICY that is rigidly enforced. If they are in compliance with Contra Costa's policies, and general policies regarding noise, etc. then it is discriminatory to single out a religious group when other social/political groups are allowed to meet in the public meeting rooms.

Good points.

[DuaneBidoux]

40. I don't agree with this one.

If you are going to open it up to some groups you need to open it up to all groups. It is public and since it is a confined space that has been reserved it is not like it is being foisted on anyone (unlike for example the 10 commandments in a public courthouse).

Many groups from local Democratic party meetings (where our local party meets) to "Young gay's and Lesbian's Support Group, etc. have used public facilities such as libraries. I don't want us to be banned and so we must give others the same freedom.

[greccogirl]

48. Yes - you cannot

discriminate against a group simply because it has to do with religion. If it's open to all it should be open to this group.

[carolinayellowdog]

53. It IS open to all groups, but not to all activities

read the decision

[LostinVA]

54. Correct -- no one is saying the group can't meet

They can't meet and carrying on an actual religious ceremony... I think that's totally fair, and I believe it does break separation of church and state. Let 'em meet and discuss their bake sale or whatever. Let them do to a member's house, or the woods, or something for their actual worship service.

And, I'm also saying that from a librarian's POV. This would never, ever be allowed where I work.

[silvermachine]

59. It wouldn't be allowed...

...at the one where I am employed also, which is a public library also in VA. And that is how it should be. I'm amazed at the failure of some people on this board to grasp the concept of separation of church and state. In certain posts, it seems to be done willfilly. La-la-la-, I can't see or hear your logical, fact based argument so I'm free to misinterpret the Constitution. La-la-la-....

[llmart]

70. I am in charge of booking the meeting rooms...........

in the library where I work. We have a written policy that specifically spells out what our meeting rooms can or cannot be used for. I do not allow businesses that are seeking to promote their goods or services to use the room, but if a business wants to use the room to have a staff meeting they are allowed to use it. Keep in mind that the main reason we have meeting rooms is so that the library can set up and offer interesting programs to their patrons and those programs come first in booking meeting rooms. I do not allow any group to book a room week after week for months on end because that means the room is not available for librarians to use for their programs.

Our written policy specifically states that religious groups cannot use the rooms for religious services. If they wanted to use the room to have their volunteer Sunday school teachers receive orientation, I would allow them to book it.

Also, libraries don't generally "rent" their rooms. They are free.

[Anakin Skywalker]

42. Self-Deleted to Preserve Harmony Here @ D.U.

:)

[Wretched Refuse]

51. Harmony

1) is Over-rated when you are being raped by the busheviks
2) is not the thing squishy lefties need to do now
3) Harmony, harmony, we don't need no stinkin harmony

[Bridget Burke]

55. "Allowing prayer services would mean taxpayers would be subsidizing..

"... religious exercises."

Apparently some here did not bother to read the article. The rooms are not rented but available free. This is not a poor little church group, struggling to survive, but a big, fat media exercise.

In December, the Bush administration weighed in on the case, filing a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the church. The administration said the government "has an interest in enforcement of First Amendment principles providing equal treatment of persons irrespective of their religious beliefs."

The Alliance Defense Fund is representing the Church. www.alliancedefensefund.org/main/default.aspx

The Alliance Defense Fund is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.

Houston's Lakewood Church began in a converted feed store. Recently, it moved into the Summit--after the Houston Rockets built a new arena. It's one of the more sincere mega-churches--not overtly political & preaching a positive message rather than hellfire & brimstone. Not my style, surely (even if I weren't a non-Believer). But it's a sincere Church with humble beginnings--on PRIVATE PROPERTY.

[Ilsa]

56. Can it be used by a group that wants to have an orgy there?

Just regular group sex, no pedophiles or anything tooooo kinky. The way I see it, the group can meet there. but not have their orgies there. I wouldn't want my tax dollars going toward that.

Same thing with the religious group: they can have a meeting about whatever, even open their meeting with a prayer, but then conduct their business, not a worship service.

[VegasWolf]

60. Wait, not so fast, let's consider whether this is a good use of facilities

:evilgrin:

[ileus]

61. If the courts can tell religious groups no to public buildings...

Maybe religious tax payers (I'm sure most religious people still pay city, state, and federal taxes)should have the option of not funding areas of government they can't use.

[VegasWolf]

63. Good, then I don't want Bush using my Federal dollars for war. nt

[starroute]

64. The real issue seems to be proselytizing

This is not a group looking to hold private meetings for its own members. This is a group aggressively seeking to convert others and explicitly using the library for that purpose.

From the decision:

http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A893E056B32B153882571EE00794928/$file/0516132.pdf?openelement

According to Faith Center’s verified amended complaint, Pastor Hopkins believes that she is called to share her Christian faith with others. Pastor Hopkins believes that there are many individuals who need to hear about the gospel of Jesus Christ but who may never enter a traditional church building. To reach those individuals, Pastor Hopkins holds meetings and worship services in non-church buildings under the auspices of Faith Center. . . .

Pastor Hopkins believes that divine providence guided her to begin holding Faith Center meetings in Antioch, California. In May 2004, Pastor Hopkins submitted applications requesting to use the County’s Antioch Branch Library meeting room for May 29, 2004 and July 31, 2004. In each application, Pastor Hopkins described the purpose of Faith Center’s meetings as “Prayer, Praise and Worship Open to the Public, Purpose to Teach and Encourage Salvation thru Jesus Christ and Build up Community.”

[starroute]

65. And also that they're trying to have it both ways

On one hand, the church is arguing that discussions of religious books, of personal experiences, and of social issues from a religious perspective are no different than equivalent activities permitted in the library when carried out on a secular basis. And the court accepts that some of the church's activities were of that nature and were legitimate. However:

The district court understood, and Faith Center did not dispute, the contention that the afternoon activities constituted pure religious worship services. Rather, Faith Center argued before the district court that its religious worship could not be distinguished from the rest of its religious speech, and for the court to make such a distinction was constitutionally impermissible.

In other words, A=B and B=C so therefore A=C. But the nature of "B" changes in mid-equation, from "discussion of social and personal issues from a religious perspective" to "religious activities that incidentally happen to consist of discussion." So the church is trying to pull a fast one.

Another issue involved here -- that would stand out a lot more starkly if our society were not so rigorously rationalist -- is that religious worship is a form of magical ritual. (And don't get on my case for using the term -- I'm not trying to insult anyone. I'm speaking in a technical sense.) If the library could just say, "speech is allowed in the meeting rooms, but rituals are not," it would be a whole lot clearer. But ritual and the supernatural in general are not permitted in public discouse here, so everybody had to walk in circles around the topic, and things get very muddy.

[Bridget Burke]

66. The Alliance Defense Fund is behind this....

Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund say they will appeal today’s decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that ruled against a Christian ministry barred from holding meetings in the community room of a public library.

“Christian community groups should not be treated any differently than other community groups,” said ADF Chief Counsel Benjamin Bull, who argued the case Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries v. Glover before the 9th Circuit on behalf of the Christian ministry. “The panel of judges in this case unfortunately ruled in a way which allows libraries to unconstitutionally exclude certain members of the community from public meeting rooms based upon the content of their speech. ADF will aggressively pursue an appeal of this ruling.”

www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=3859

No matter that the "meeting" is a religious service--in a room free to the public--that is, paid for by all taxpayers. Many a church has begun in a rented store front. Why are Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries more intent on legal battles than saving souls?

Check out the site to learn about the ADF, "a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation." Ah, yes...the War Against Christianity!

Check out their "Allies"--Concerned Women for America, Heritage Society, American Family Association.

www.alliancedefensefund.org/about/Allies/Policy.aspx