Plans to condemn Southern Baptist church; eminent domain

Discussion in '2006 Archive' started by Monergist, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Seems to me that a Republican-dominated Congress has the power to enact laws to stop this........

    Regards,
    BiR
     
  3. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its more profitable for the Republican dominated Congress to talk a big game about these things than it is to actually do something to stop them...
     
  4. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    268
    They did enact a law:
    The Federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.

    It's a fairly broad law. So, the city of Long Beach is in for a some rough times want to push this matter. A good lawyer (and it looks like Filipino Baptist has some) can tie Long Beach up in knots in Federal Court with FeRelLuIPA. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt (and it's not even a rag yet)
     
  5. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    9,943
    Likes Received:
    72
    Actually, it's up to the state legislatures, not the Congress, because most of the condemnations are at the local level.
     
  6. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    268
    And the State legislatures have been falling all over themselves to close the biggest loopholes. Like I wrote earlier, under current Federal law, Long Beach looks to have bitten off more than it can chew.
     
  7. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Where are they at? Wasn't it them who started the ball rolling?
     
  8. Ben W

    Ben W
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,868
    Likes Received:
    0
    Baptists and other Christians in the area should put forward several candidates at the next Council election, and give them a taste of their own medicine!
     
  9. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    268
    What part of The Federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 don't you understand? Congress passed the law y'all want six years ago. Why do we need a new one? That and Congress, with the Rhode Island eminent domain case in mind, has tightened up what kind of projects Federal funds can be spent on. The thing to do now is to see how this works through the Courts.
    Where are they at? Wasn't it them who started the ball rolling?</font>[/QUOTE]
     
  10. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    But, since we're dealing with California, home of the 9th circuit, I don't think US laws apply anymore... :(
     
  11. Rob't K. Fall

    Rob't K. Fall
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2000
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the case, I was involved in the Federal Court gently nudged the city of Sacramento for their failure to comply with the law cited by the Squire. The city saw the handwriting on the wall and began serious negoiations.
     
  12. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,580
    Likes Received:
    256
    It was only a matter of time.

    We can thank the liberals on the Supreme Court for this gift.

    With the current makeup of the Supreme Court, it is doubtful that this issue will fare as well as the first...if it gets that far.
     
  13. UnchartedSpirit

    UnchartedSpirit
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,176
    Likes Received:
    0
    wait...wern't our two new justices going to do something about that?
     
  14. Squire Robertsson

    Squire Robertsson
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2000
    Messages:
    9,349
    Likes Received:
    268
    Yes, but a case has to make its way up to that level. This one hasn't even made it to district court,
     
  15. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Yep, that's pretty similar to what Rush Limbaugh has said...

    There aren't enough "LIBERALS" on the Supreme Court to comprise a majority. I would like to think that you knew that......

    Regards,
    BiR
     
  16. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,580
    Likes Received:
    256
    "Stevens was joined in the majority by three other liberal justices, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, and by Anthony Kennedy, a moderate conservative who is often a swing vote. Kennedy also filed a concurring opinion suggesting that some condemnations of private property might be unconstitutional if there is "the risk of undetected impermissible favoritism of private parties" by the body exercising eminent domain."

    As I said, we can thank the liberals for allowing that travesty of justice.
     
  17. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Who nominated Souter and Kennedy?
    Former President Clinton nominated Ginsburg, but who claims to have been the one who recommended her to him?
     
  18. Bro. James Reed

    Bro. James Reed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    0
    Doesn't matter who nominated them. The fact that they are liberal still stands. I would think that even you would agree that these 5 justices, and 4 of them for sure, are usually pretty liberal.

    The current make-up of the court does not change how the vote on this ruling would turn out. O'Connor and Rehnquist both voted on the losing side, with Kelo, in the eminent domain case. Those votes would more than likely stay the same with the new justices, still leaving us with a 5-4 vote against property rights.

    Either Souter, Ginsburg, Kennedy, Stevens, or Breyer need to leave the court and be replaced by a real conservative in order for the court to flip on major issues. Stevens, the most liberal, imo, will probably be the next to go.
     
  19. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    I would say that Souter and Kennedy are moderate, not liberal.

    STRONGLY disagree with you on that one......

    Regards,
    BiR
     
  20. Bro. James Reed

    Bro. James Reed
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2002
    Messages:
    2,992
    Likes Received:
    0
    Care to elaborate, BiR?
     

Share This Page

Loading...