I does not appear you read my comment.
I read your comment. What you are not understanding is that a missionary is a missionary period. And you are pretending that while they were accepting an invitation and standing there at Mass, they were something other than a missionary.
That’s just as pretentious
It is calling a duck a duck.
I think you are quite imaginative.
In what way? That missionaries aren’t engaged in missionary work, in everything they do and say? Tell me, what kind of missionary would that missionary be if they weren’t engaged in their mission work at all times?
I think this is an oversimplification of the issue to your advantage, people are welcome what wasn’t welcome were those that behave inappropriately, some rules where set up to create a pleasant atmosphere for all.
ummm, no, the church engaged in political activities in order to create an atmosphere that is free from criticism and competition.
Let’s review. The city made a deal with the LDS church, to sell a block of Main street. In that deal, it was clearly written that their was a public easement. A public easement is not some wild frontier. Normal modes of conduct are expected with the established laws.
This public easement was the very first condition of the city council.
The city council recommended the sale as long as their were no more restrictions than there would be at a public park. These were public meetings.
This was followed by a CLOSED meeting between the LDS church and the Salt Lake attorney, where the LDS church stated it must control all activities. The Salt Lake attorney gave a draft of the easement to the city council, stating that public access was consistent with what the planning commission had approved.
In a public hearing, no one from the city attorney’s office pointed out that they had removed the planning commissions requirement for public access. A citizen member of the planning commission pointed out that the petition being put forth is not the same as the petition that was approved by the planning commission.
The Mayor then signed a special warranty deed, stating the city retrained rights to the public easement with special extensive conditions for conduct. With a clause for severing the deed if any of it is found to be unconstitutional.
The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the city, saying the restrictions are unconstitutional. The LDS Church ADDED THEMSELVES as a defendant in the case.
The district Federal court ruled in favor of the city and church. The ACLU appealed to the circuit court, this court ruled the restrictions are unconstitutional (First Amendment rights).
The new Mayor then vowed that the easement would not be transferred to the LDS church. Siting that the easement is not as important as the guarantee of public access. Deseret News poll showed that mormons believe the LDS church should be given the easement, and a majority of non-LDS believe the city should keep the public easement. The issue became a cultural and religious divide.
The LDS church dispensed an expensive, glossy, full color folder with inserts, with a letter from Pres. Hinckley regarding the “The New Church Plaza” to thousands of businesses and citizens (I received one).
The Mayor proposed the easement be narrowed to the width of a sidewalk, removed from temple activity, and laws established that impose time, place and manner restrictions.
Due to the cultural and religious divide, an alliance is formed by citizens, which proposes to the Mayor that the LDS church exchange for an easement on the west side of the city, and fund the building of a community center on the west side.
Numerous public meetings are held, eventually a unanimous city council signs the easement.
The US Supreme court refuses to hear the LDS church appeal.
The ACLU sued again, calling for a examination of the entire process and whether or not the LDS church received special treatment. And, if the agreement violates free speech.
The court granted the city and LDS church request to dismiss the case, based on the fact that the city had the right to the transaction. The court declared the Main St Plaza as no longer a public forum.
I agree, it has wide implications. It obviously validated the LDS church’s stance that they can do whatever they like in the state of Utah and abroad.
continued…
