I would like to present a theoretical legal question just to instill some thought.  I do not know the answer to this, but it is worth thinking about and commenting on.  Ultimately, I think that this somehow goes to the seperation of Church and State and Home Rule.  Here it goes:

1. Assume that we have a community or a town which consists of around 500 persons (or some other relatively small number).

2. Assume that everyone in that community just so happens to be an Aethist; this is not by design, but by statistical accident.  It can happen, but it is highly unlikely, but consider this to be true for the case study.

3. Assume that none of those aethists belong to any HOW.  That one is easy to swallow and would be likely and could easilty be taken as a given.

4. Assume that a Mega or Giga church decided to purchase a property in said town and move in with a projected membership of 20,000 members from 20 miles away from our little town.  Because of this, the entire township infrastructure would be streched to the bones requiring substantial investment to support the church causing property taxes to skyrocket for those citizens.  The burden could actually crush the town and destroy it financially.

5. Now the zingers.  Why in my theoritical situation would those aethists be required to support this religion?  Would that not be tantamount to state sponsored religion being forced upon those aethists?  Would that not also violate the home rule provisions of the constitution?  Would those citizens have zero to say about their fate as a political body?  Is that not a form of forced taxation without representation? 

6. If a church can do the above, why not a business?  All that the businesss would have to do is re-incorporate as a non profit.  After all, we all know that is what ire-land is doing.  He is running a business under the auspice of a church.  No difference.  BTW - Howard Hughs did just that and it worked for him.

7. The above described situation is a corner condition designed to make some legal points.  In reality, this would not occur because of probabilities.  However, a gradient of that theoretical situation is happening right here in RT.  For example, we are not all aethists, but clearly we are not members of CC.  As a matter of fact, none of us are.  If my theoritical would not be allowed by constitutional law, what is the differentiator between that and the CC sitution?

Give it some thought.  This could be another interesting angle to fight that jerk; I am referring to the wolf in sheeps clothing otherwise known as a business in church clothing called CC, having no membership here.  It seems like it is a form of forced servitude if the federal government requires us to comply with their RLUIPA law in the CC case.  I personally doubt its constitutionality.

What do you think?