IIRC the conditions were exceptionally bad, and the action appeared to be tailored to make a legal argument that a (Christian) church wasn’t bound by things like health and safety codes, occupancy limits, or zoning.
It’s strategically created to make the Christian church in question seem sympathetic, although he could have moved to a different location, and/or complied with health and safety codes.
Again - look for what Hemant Mehta has written about this. I can’t find the podcast ATM, and I’m too sick (flu) to spend all day trying to find anything he would have written about it.
Your link doesn’t paint a different picture than the OP.
IIRC the conditions were exceptionally bad, and the action appeared to be tailored to make a legal argument that a (Christian) church wasn’t bound by things like health and safety codes, occupancy limits, or zoning.
It’s strategically created to make the Christian church in question seem sympathetic, although he could have moved to a different location, and/or complied with health and safety codes.
Again - look for what Hemant Mehta has written about this. I can’t find the podcast ATM, and I’m too sick (flu) to spend all day trying to find anything he would have written about it.