In a message dated 3/12/2007 5:01:10 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
when a religious institution objects to the proximal location of a business whose sole purpose activity which is in direct contravention to the religion's basic tenets, you don't have to go too far to come up with reasonable reason for that opposition. That's true, Mike. And I thought I had acknowledged this when I wrote "They may be motivated by their religious beliefs." But Melani's statement was "A religious group here in University City is asking the Philadelphia government to deny a zoning use of a property based on religious law." And I don't believe the Muslims in question used religious law as the basis on which they asked the ZBA to deny the zoning variance. There's a difference here. Now, maybe Melani's right in he claim that they tried to get the city to make a decision based on religious principles. In which case, I'd take the stand that their request was not valid. Do you see the difference? It's quite striking to me. Still looking for the facts, Al Krigman <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
