Atheist Group Forces City to break Contract with Church
Posted on December 1, 2006
Cross Posted from Yet Another Conservative Right Wing Blog: When reading the following release from the Alliance Defence Fund, the old proverb “There is no Honor among Thieves” comes to mind. Apparently Honor, as in honoring a contract, is a wholey religious concept- which both these Atheists and the City of Detroit are woefully lacking.
Alliance Defense Fund attorneys filed a motion Monday in federal court to intervene on behalf of an inner-city Detroit church hung out to dry due to the actions of the American Atheists.
The city had asked the church and other downtown establishments to alter the appearance of their properties to improve the city’s image for the upcoming Super Bowl in exchange for being reimbursed for half the expense. But because the atheist group has now sued the city, the city has been forced to withhold reimbursement from the church, even though the church has already secured a loan for and completed the requested improvements.
What a sad, sad state of affairs. I am more disapointed in Detroit that I am in the Atheists, however. We can expect Atheist to do what they have always complained that we Christians do - push there religious views on others. The city of Detroit however, has no excuse. This is not about establishment, it is about landscaping. The church took specific steps to beautify its exterior as requested by the city, and now the city has been scared into not living up to its end of the deal. The activites of the city of Detroit are deplorable, dishonest, and callous. The Atheist activists are just being extreme atheists.
In January, St. John’s Episcopal Church entered into a contract with the City of Detroit Development Authority to “enhance the visual appearance of street facing building facades and parking lot edges, prevent blight, attract businesses, and complement infrastructure.†The contract provided that the DDA would reimburse the church for 50 percent of the expenditures–up to $180,000–for the improvements.
After the church borrowed $180,000 to complete the improvements, they submitted the documents required for payment to the DDA, which, under the terms of the contract, was to reimburse the church within 30 days. American Atheists filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging that the city violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution by entering into the contract with the church.
This is the part that I cannot fathom. What does “enhancing the visual appearance” have to do with the Establishment clause? The City of Detroit is taking steps to beautify its city and nothing more. If my last trip to Detroit is a far reference, the city needs some enhancing of its visual appearance. This is a frivolous lawsuit, and shame on Detroit for not seeing that. Further shame on Detroit for not standing by its commitments. Any fall-out of this lawsuit should be for the city alone, and should not change the city’s contract and commitment to local business.
» Filed Under Uncategorized
Trackback URL
Comments
5 Responses to “Atheist Group Forces City to break Contract with Church”
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Advertise
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
Depends on how they went about it. Was this a widely available development or did the city offer the funds directly to certain organizations? Did the nearby mosque and kingdom hall have a similar opportunity to “enhance their visual appearances”?
If the answers are no then it is far from frivolous to suggest that the contract amounts to “religious preference.” If the answers are yes, then the church would probably be justified in suing the city for breach of contract.
Actually, that is, and has been, a beautiful church for quite some time.
In fact, the couple square miles surrounding those stadiums is quite nice didn’t require any visual enhancements. It’s the rest of the city that’s a stinkhole and they didn’t do anything to change that.
Jeff:
I think your complaint just muddies the waters. The complain, which you can find here, never seems to address any equal access or equal protection issues. The sole stance of the Atheists in the complaint is the use of tax dollars going to a religions organization.
I agree with the core premise, however. The exercise to beautify the city should be open where there is a need with little consideration to the mission or religious preferences of the building owners. The goal being to improve the city experience not to redirect taxpayer money.
The converse needs to be equally true. We cannot discriminate against religions organizations just because they have beliefs that others do not hold.
Thank you for the link. I many (most?) jurisdictions, you interpretation is accurate. The prevailing interpretation of the US Constitutions establishment is that government can show neither preference, nor malice towards religious organizations, so as long as it was an open process, the church would have been eligible for reimbursement.
But according to the complaint, the Michigan Constitution is much more strict (which I didn’t know until a few minutes ago).
There really isn’t much wiggle room there. It’s a shame the way things went down, but this isn’t an obscure law we’re talking about. Both parties should have been aware of it.
“American Atheists filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging that the city violated the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution by entering into the contract with the church.”
It sounds like a lawsuit meant for harassment rather than one that will succeed as the federal government has made similar arrangements with religious organizations.
Jeff, You may have a point about the Michigan Constitution but that was grounds of the lawsuit according to Davef’s post.