DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**WebDocMan** · 06-01-2007, 11:49 PM

I would be surprised if it was - however in the OP Partofme stated:

"What gets me though is that this thing is more common but doesn't get the attention this does because Muslims are involved this time. In the town I grew up in a bar that had been open for years was forced to close because a church moved in next to it and the law states you can't have a place that sells or serves alcohol within so many feet of a church."

It would be interesting in any links that partofme can find regarding this incident. It appears dead wrong to close a business under long established property law decisions for the reasons he cited. Accepting what he said as being accurate, obviously the bar when it was in operation was built without a church being within the distance requirement or else it would have never been allowed to function at all. The church came along and built itself within the distance requirement. This situation would then put the bar outside the law, but since the bar was legal when functioning, and the church's subsequent establishment is what put the bar outside the letter of the law, it should be deemed a 'nonconforming use' and still have been allowed to operate until such time as someone stopped using the property as a bar.

06-01-2007, 11:49 PM	#13
WebDocMan Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 513 Senior Member	I would be surprised if it was - however in the OP Partofme stated: "What gets me though is that this thing is more common but doesn't get the attention this does because Muslims are involved this time. In the town I grew up in a bar that had been open for years was forced to close because a church moved in next to it and the law states you can't have a place that sells or serves alcohol within so many feet of a church." It would be interesting in any links that partofme can find regarding this incident. It appears dead wrong to close a business under long established property law decisions for the reasons he cited. Accepting what he said as being accurate, obviously the bar when it was in operation was built without a church being within the distance requirement or else it would have never been allowed to function at all. The church came along and built itself within the distance requirement. This situation would then put the bar outside the law, but since the bar was legal when functioning, and the church's subsequent establishment is what put the bar outside the letter of the law, it should be deemed a 'nonconforming use' and still have been allowed to operate until such time as someone stopped using the property as a bar.
	Quote