Sounds like we need to establish a litmus test for religious organization based on behavior, not merely name. If they don't receive public funds and are a religious organization then they are exempt. 

Ed, interesting point you bring up. Ability to not pay tax could be seen as "funding" I suppose. I wonder how funding is defined, or could be defined by a court?

To what degree did our forefathers (religious believers, not athiests) intend for us to be "free to do" as we please?

Freedom has a price and responsibility, is it not intended to be all for one and one for all? Granted, not all want to share in maintaining the status quo.  

Consider that religion is in some ways similar to water, some need more of it to survive and some need less however without water you shrivel up and die. Without religion is a choice you chose to make or not.

Each church sets its own rules which in most cases government has no control over, except when society determines the rules contrary to society (polygamy, abortion, theft, etc.?)  

We theoretically still have religious freedom. However, there was a contract formed many decades ago that in trade for tax-free status, the church would not interfere in politics. That agreement is no longer adhered to.

Seems to me that if churches want to change the agreement, we should start over. No tax free status and they can do what they want and negotiate a new agreement. Seems best for the country, let's do it.

California, when adopting the ADA as its base language for the 2013 CBC, chose to keep the requirements in for religious facilities. For those of you designing in California, 2013 California Building Code Section 11B-244 states: "Religious facilities shall be accessible in accordance with the provisions of this code. Where specific areas within religious facilities contain more than one use, each portion shall comply with the applicable requirements for that use."

I've had a few design professionals licensed in CA but based out of state submit plans for churches and funeral homes expecting, and insisting, that they need not be accessible.

Add Reply