• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

ReligiousLiberty.TV / Founders' First Freedom®

religious liberty and religious freedom news

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
Home » Landowner Of Proposed Muslim Community Site Files Suit Against Town

Landowner Of Proposed Muslim Community Site Files Suit Against Town

July 8, 2008 by Michael Peabody

In Walkersville, Maryland, a landowner who wanted to sell his farm to a Muslim group is suing the town for religious discrimination because they have refused his right to do so. This is a classic case of “NIMBYism” (Not in My Back Yard) where city officials used what sounds like neutral language to carefully make it impossible for a religious group to build and use property. This often occurs because religious facilities are perceived to use resources without paying taxes, traffic, and even religious discrimination.

Click the link following this excerpt to read the rest of the story:

In March, the Town of Walkersville denied AMC a special exception to build a place of worship on Moxley’s land.

They cited traffic and infrastructure concerns because AMC wanted to use the land for an annual convention for 10,000 people.

Moxley’s attorney says the farm could support a group that large.

“It’s only when the group happens to be Muslim, that they’ve pulled out all the stops and prevented them from locating in the town,” Storzer said.

http://your4state.com/content/fulltext/?cid=20651

Filed Under: Discrimination, Top Story Tagged With: Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, David Moxley, Kaitlin McCarthy, Land Use, Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, RLUIPA, Roman Storzer, Walkersville

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Gina says

    July 8, 2008 at 3:27 pm

    They could have at least tried to make it seem like it was something other than the obvious. Sheesh. I mean, how stupid do we really look? Wait, don’t answer that. 🙂

  2. Gina says

    July 8, 2008 at 8:27 am

    They could have at least tried to make it seem like it was something other than the obvious. Sheesh. I mean, how stupid do we really look? Wait, don’t answer that. 🙂

  3. Olathe says

    July 8, 2008 at 4:14 pm

    Okay, now this has just GOT TO BE ILLEGAL, right? You can’t get away with religious discrimination nowadays can you? Please tell me this can’t still be happening in 2008! What is wrong with people!? And how ignorant are these people who think a person’s religion will tell them if they are a good tenant or businessperson or anything? The nerve and the stupidity is just shameful!

  4. Olathe says

    July 8, 2008 at 9:14 am

    Okay, now this has just GOT TO BE ILLEGAL, right? You can’t get away with religious discrimination nowadays can you? Please tell me this can’t still be happening in 2008! What is wrong with people!? And how ignorant are these people who think a person’s religion will tell them if they are a good tenant or businessperson or anything? The nerve and the stupidity is just shameful!

  5. maddy says

    July 8, 2008 at 6:35 pm

    I think both sides have a point. The land owner is entitled to sell his land to anyone, but on the other hand I wouldn’t like an extremist religious group on my backyard. But who am I to say who is and who isn’t an extremist. I guess they could come to an understanding or use a mediator in any case. What a difficult situation. I have some nuns that live on the corner of my house that rented a place there and the same around the corner. I hear singing every Sunday I guess for their Sunday service. I suppose it doesn’t harm anyone.

  6. maddy says

    July 8, 2008 at 11:35 am

    I think both sides have a point. The land owner is entitled to sell his land to anyone, but on the other hand I wouldn’t like an extremist religious group on my backyard. But who am I to say who is and who isn’t an extremist. I guess they could come to an understanding or use a mediator in any case. What a difficult situation. I have some nuns that live on the corner of my house that rented a place there and the same around the corner. I hear singing every Sunday I guess for their Sunday service. I suppose it doesn’t harm anyone.

  7. KSmith says

    July 9, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    Unfortunately, predjudice is a fact of life in the United States. Most Americans are scared of the unknown and refuse change. We, as a country, could learn a lot from other nations if we allowed ourselves to have an open mind.

  8. KSmith says

    July 9, 2008 at 3:09 pm

    Unfortunately, predjudice is a fact of life in the United States. Most Americans are scared of the unknown and refuse change. We, as a country, could learn a lot from other nations if we allowed ourselves to have an open mind.

  9. Erin says

    July 9, 2008 at 6:57 pm

    I can see where a new religous building constructed in any town could be a hassle to the towns people. Especially, when it is a religous group that so often descriminated against. However, of the local people of the town took some time to understand the Muslin faith, they would realize it could be a beautiful additon to their community. Unfortunatly, local government does have the power to block the sale based on the reasons given. It will be interesting to see the outcome of the lawsuit.

  10. Erin says

    July 9, 2008 at 11:57 am

    I can see where a new religous building constructed in any town could be a hassle to the towns people. Especially, when it is a religous group that so often descriminated against. However, of the local people of the town took some time to understand the Muslin faith, they would realize it could be a beautiful additon to their community. Unfortunatly, local government does have the power to block the sale based on the reasons given. It will be interesting to see the outcome of the lawsuit.

Primary Sidebar

Geneva, Switzerland - December 03, 2019: World Health Organization (WHO / OMS) Headquarters - DepositPhotos.com

Biden admin could hand over US control of health emergencies to WHO next week

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The ultimate control over America’s health care and its national sovereignty will be put up for a vote next week at a meeting of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).  On May 22-28, 2022, the 75th World Health Assembly will convene at the United Nations […]

Statement on the Leak in Dobbs

The leak was intended to disrupt the processing of the decision and we are not going to dignify the leak or the unidentified leaker by analyzing it prematurely. As a constitutional republic we cannot go down that road without doing severe damage to the institution of the Supreme Court where there must be professional courtesy between the justices and their staffs.

Boston City Hall - photo from Supreme Court Opinion

Supreme Court rules 9-0 that Boston violated 1st Amendment in refusing Christian flag at City Hall

This morning the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Shurtleff v. Boston (Dec’d 5/2/2022) that the city of Boston violated the free speech rights of a Christian group when it refused to allow them to participate in a city flag raising program.

Active Liberty - a survey of Justice Stephen Breyer's religion clause jurisprudence - Supreme Court

Active Liberty: A Survey of Justice Stephen Breyer’s Religion Clause Decisions

A comprehensive review of retiring Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer’s decisions in Free Exercise and Establishment Clause cases.

Canadian gov’t calculates that expansion of assisted suicide will save taxpayers millions of dollars

In Canada, it is easier for the disabled who do not suffer terminal illness to get approval for assisted suicide than approval for affordable housing. The government has calculated the cost of providing healthcare versus providing assisted suicide.

Random Quote

“It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much … to forget it.”

— James Madison

Get the ReligiousLiberty.TV Newsletter!

Comes out a couple of times a month. Unsubscribe anytime automatically, no questions asked.
* = required field
unsubscribe from list

powered by MailChimp!

Copyright © 2022 Founders' First Freedom is a registered trademark. All rights reserved.

  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Articles
  • Podcast
0
0
0
0