D.C. church says a bike lane would infringe upon its constitutional ‘rights of religious freedom’

  • metta

    Posts: 39165

    Oct 15, 2015 4:20 PM GMT
    D.C. church says a bike lane would infringe upon its constitutional ‘rights of religious freedom’

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2015/10/14/d-c-church-says-a-bike-lane-would-infringe-upon-its-constitutional-rights-of-religious-freedom/
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Oct 16, 2015 11:11 AM GMT
    This is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 16, 2015 12:17 PM GMT
    "God's White House"? I can't even. So much for separation of church & state.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Oct 16, 2015 8:25 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 16, 2015 8:29 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.


    Yes, but trying to imply that they are being singled out as an affront to their religious rights is a bit of a stretch, and I say that as a Christian! They have every right to protest the change for practical reasons, but trying to parlay these things into a constitutional issue is getting ridiculous.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Oct 16, 2015 8:37 PM GMT
    ShiftyJK08 said
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.


    Yes, but trying to imply that they are being singled out as an affront to their religious rights is a bit of a stretch, and I say that as a Christian! They have every right to protest the change for practical reasons, but trying to parlay these things into a constitutional issue is getting ridiculous.


    The last sentence of my previous post clearly indicated that I was not addressing the religious discrimination matter. Considering that the bike lane would equally affect non-religious organizations, the claim that it is anti-religious surely is a stretch at the very least.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 16, 2015 9:39 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    Talk about entitled...

    article: "...Consequently, as many car lanes and parking spaces as possible are needed on the street..."

    So not only do they get to enjoy their property tax free, but for that tax free, they also expect free fire protection, free police protection, free civil air patrol protection I presume, all at a cost to the public, but now they also want traffic flow at the expense of cyclers who do pay taxes and parking at the expense of the public who pay taxes unlike churches that seek benefit without purchase?

    Which religious freedom is that? The holy freedom to steal?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 16, 2015 9:45 PM GMT
    FRE0 said

    The last sentence of my previous post clearly indicated that I was not addressing the religious discrimination matter. Considering that the bike lane would equally affect non-religious organizations, the claim that it is anti-religious surely is a stretch at the very least.


    Understood. There are legit concerns that any business or institution in the area could make about parking, but they should be keeping it practical if they want anybody to take them seriously. Congregations with my church engage in discourse about things that effect the neighborhood, but they do it as a neighbor, not someone who should have special rights.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Oct 16, 2015 9:51 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.
    I understand that not everyone can ride a bike. But public transportation on the other hand, anyone can ride. It is time to shift our transportation funding priorities away from cars and roads and increasing funding for public transportation which can enable it to improve and expand service even to outlaying areas.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Oct 17, 2015 12:50 AM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.
    I understand that not everyone can ride a bike. But public transportation on the other hand, anyone can ride. It is time to shift our transportation funding priorities away from cars and roads and increasing funding for public transportation which can enable it to improve and expand service even to outlaying areas.


    I agree that we've spent too much on providing for cars to the detriment of the environment and to people who cannot afford a car. It may be that future generations will see the Interstate Highway System, which was begun in the 1950s, as a serious mistake. Unfortunately, for the time being, we have to live with what we have and, until we can improve public transportation, we really have to make adequate provision for cars.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 17, 2015 7:58 AM GMT
    I'm amazed that bike centricity has not been challenged legally since it clearly violates ADA ( American disability Act) All over San Francisco previously accessible public spaces are being converted to bike spaces which are obviously only used by a tiny fraction of the public ; those that are young and able bodied.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Oct 17, 2015 5:56 PM GMT
    lol, the young and able bodied are "a tiny fraction" of the population? really?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 17, 2015 6:14 PM GMT
    tj85016 saidlol, the young and able bodied are "a tiny fraction" of the population? really?



    In a church they are!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 17, 2015 7:59 PM GMT
    Alpha13 saidI'm amazed that bike centricity has not been challenged legally since it clearly violates ADA ( American disability Act) All over San Francisco previously accessible public spaces are being converted to bike spaces which are obviously only used by a tiny fraction of the public ; those that are young and able bodied.

    ummm... That may not necessarily be true in every case. I'm 100% disabled, with a car handicapped permit. I also ride a bicycle. That's because I can ride it easier than I can walk with a cane; I sometimes call my bike my 2-wheeled wheelchair. Some disabled guys ride an adult tricycle, and maybe that'll be my next step, perhaps with electric assist.

    Of course many disabled will not be able to ride a bike at all, being confined to a wheelchair or incapable of biking for other reasons. But are designated handicapped parking spaces really being sacrificed for bike lanes, with no replacements provided?
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Oct 17, 2015 8:28 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob said
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.
    I understand that not everyone can ride a bike. But public transportation on the other hand, anyone can ride. It is time to shift our transportation funding priorities away from cars and roads and increasing funding for public transportation which can enable it to improve and expand service even to outlaying areas.


    I agree that we've spent too much on providing for cars to the detriment of the environment and to people who cannot afford a car. It may be that future generations will see the Interstate Highway System, which was begun in the 1950s, as a serious mistake. Unfortunately, for the time being, we have to live with what we have and, until we can improve public transportation, we really have to make adequate provision for cars.
    No we don't. It is time to stop centering all our transportation needs around cars and highways. It is time to strongly discourage car centric development and sprawl and pursue a more sustainable, condensed type of development at higher densities. Public policy needs to be changed and transportation funding priorities need to be redirected as soon as possible. What you are suggesting is just more of the unworkable, unsustainable status quo. We definitely need to make public transportation more convenient and user friendly and discourage more cars on the road. It is time for the U.S. to permanently end its love affair with the automobile once and for all.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 17, 2015 8:59 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob said
    FRE0 said
    roadbikeRob saidThis is ridiculous. The proposed bike lane does not infringe on that church's religious liberty. Probably its congregants should stop being so ignorantly car centric and use public transit to get to and from church. It is time for Americans to get away from automobiles and start fully embracing walking, cycling, and public transportation. That will reduce congestion, cut down on pollution, improve quality of life, and most importantly it will save lives.


    Not everyone is capable of riding a bicycle. Some lack adequate balance to do so. Some have physical limitations which would make it impossible. Others may come from far enough away to make it impractical. For some people, a destination is only a 15 minute ride by car but a two or more hour trip by public transportation.

    Whether the church's objections are valid is another matter, but it ought to be obvious that bicycle riding is not an option for everyone and that public transpiration on Sundays is inadequate In many areas.
    I understand that not everyone can ride a bike. But public transportation on the other hand, anyone can ride. It is time to shift our transportation funding priorities away from cars and roads and increasing funding for public transportation which can enable it to improve and expand service even to outlaying areas.


    I agree that we've spent too much on providing for cars to the detriment of the environment and to people who cannot afford a car. It may be that future generations will see the Interstate Highway System, which was begun in the 1950s, as a serious mistake. Unfortunately, for the time being, we have to live with what we have and, until we can improve public transportation, we really have to make adequate provision for cars.
    No we don't. It is time to stop centering all our transportation needs around cars and highways. It is time to strongly discourage car centric development and sprawl and pursue a more sustainable, condensed type of development at higher densities. Public policy needs to be changed and transportation funding priorities need to be redirected as soon as possible. What you are suggesting is just more of the unworkable, unsustainable status quo. We definitely need to make public transportation more convenient and user friendly and discourage more cars on the road. It is time for the U.S. to permanently end its love affair with the automobile once and for all.






    My cold dead fingers

  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Oct 18, 2015 4:46 PM GMT
    problem solved

    57379-at-the-drive-in-classic-movies-698

    or

    st_davids_bike_parking_spoke_card.jpg
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Oct 18, 2015 7:43 PM GMT
    Alpha13 saidI'm amazed that bike centricity has not been challenged legally since it clearly violates ADA ( American disability Act) All over San Francisco previously accessible public spaces are being converted to bike spaces which are obviously only used by a tiny fraction of the public ; those that are young and able bodied.


    If more people rode bicycles, there would be more able bodied people.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14380

    Oct 21, 2015 1:09 PM GMT
    FRE0 said
    Alpha13 saidI'm amazed that bike centricity has not been challenged legally since it clearly violates ADA ( American disability Act) All over San Francisco previously accessible public spaces are being converted to bike spaces which are obviously only used by a tiny fraction of the public ; those that are young and able bodied.


    If more people rode bicycles, there would be more able bodied people.
    Good, valid point. Americans need to take better care of themselves by exercising more and not being totally dependent on motor transportation for short trips that could be easily done by foot or by bike. Americans laziness is contributing to future health and disability problems.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2015 1:40 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob said
    FRE0 said
    Alpha13 saidI'm amazed that bike centricity has not been challenged legally since it clearly violates ADA ( American disability Act) All over San Francisco previously accessible public spaces are being converted to bike spaces which are obviously only used by a tiny fraction of the public ; those that are young and able bodied.

    If more people rode bicycles, there would be more able bodied people.
    Good, valid point. Americans need to take better care of themselves by exercising more and not being totally dependent on motor transportation for short trips that could be easily done by foot or by bike. Americans laziness is contributing to future health and disability problems.

    And here's my pic, after completing one of my 165-mile charity bicycle rides to Key West, in my 60s here. I put my car handicapped permit on my handlebars. To prove what even the disabled can do. And I carry with me a special aluminum folding cane, that I need to walk when not on the bike. Never stereotype the disabled. Many of us want to ride a bicycle as much as anyone else, and do! icon_biggrin.gif

    S7300148_5%20-%20Version%202_zpsn0jny2ik

    (Permit and name badge blurred for privacy. Also showing a bit of belly bulge here, in the early phases of my cancer that I beat. I did one Ride right in the middle of my cancer treatment, actually delayed surgery in order to accommodate the annual event)