My son recently came to me and asked me why a person would want to bomb innocent people running a race in Boston.  Sometimes as dads, we just don’t have the right answer.  If he had come to me for algebra help, I could save the day.  If he needed a heavy object moved, I would be the man.  If he needed help understanding girls, well … there’s always mom!

But sometimes, we as parents just don’t have the answers.  The only thing we can do is take our cares and our concerns to our Heavenly Father.  And yes, as a nation, we can also take our country to prayer as well.  In 2 Chronicles 7:14, we read, “if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”

On Thursday, May 2, 2013, people from all walks of life will be taking their heartfelt needs to God in prayer.  Teachers, electricians, athletes, commercial real estate agents, public officials, mothers, bankers, doctors, and indeed Christians from all walks of life will be seeking the face of God.  From the Boston Marathon bombing, to Sandy Hook, to North Korea, to our economy – we as a nation lack answers and we need guidance from our Heavenly Father.

We at the Alliance Defending Freedom encourage you to join with us, and the many others, in seeking Him on this special day.  It’s needed.  It’s right.  And since we at the Alliance Defending Freedom specialize in constitutional litigation, let us also say – it’s legal!

Having a national day of fasting and prayer is as much a part of our national landscape as voting booths and majestic mountain peaks.  In 1775, the Continental Congress asked the colonies to pray for wisdom in forming this infant nation.  In George Washington’s very first address as president, the first ever address by any president to this nation, he called this nation to a day of prayer.  The call to prayer has continued throughout our history, including President Lincoln’s proclamation of a day of “humiliation, fasting, and prayer” in 1863.

In 1952, a joint resolution by Congress, signed by President Truman, continued this tradition and declared an annual, national day of prayer. In 1988, the law was amended and signed by President Reagan, setting first Thursday of every May as the National Day of Prayer.

So don’t fall prey to those claims by groups seeking to destroy religion in America.  Not everyone is proud of our religious heritage, and some wish to delete this day from our history books.  Atheists have attacked a Hattiesburg, Mississippi town for planning a prayer observance this year on May 2.  A few years ago, the Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a federal lawsuit seeking to strike down the National Day of Prayer.  But these attacks are baseless, and it is legal for all citizens, whether pastors, mayors or the president, to seek the aid of the Almighty on this special day.

If you are interested in protecting the National Day of Prayer, if you are concerned about the future of our nation, then the best way to protect the National Day of Prayer is to participate in the National Day of Prayer.  So we invite you to find an event near you,  http://nationaldayofprayer.org/events/, or if an event is not close, then by yourself or with another, join in the chorus of prayers on Thursday May 2, 2013 and let’s together seek His will.

On Wednesday, the U.S. House passed a bill to allow houses of worship to receive federal disaster aid from FEMA. The House took up the bill in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, where several churches were damaged, and voted 354-72 for the bill. If passed, the bill would include houses of worship in the federal government’s list of private nonprofit organizations that are eligible for FEMA grants to rebuild after national disasters.

The bill was co-authored by Representative Chris Smith, R-NJ, and Rep. Grace Meng, D-N.Y. Rep. Smith said, “These houses of worship are conduits of healing and rebuilding in the community, while lacking the resources to address their own structural damage.”

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., added that churches, synagogues, mosq ues, temples, and other religious institutions deserve the same treatment as other non-profit organizations. “They shouldn’t be penalized just because of their religious involvement.”

The exclusion of churches from FEMA does not make sense. Under current rules, disaster relief is available for several nonprofit organizations, including colleges, universities, parochial schools, hospitals, museums, zoos, community centers, libraries, homeless shelters, senior citizen centers, rehabilitation facilities, shelter workshops and facilities that provide health and safety services. But in order to qualify, an entity generally had to spend over fifty percent of its activities in one of the listed areas. So to qualify as a community center, it has to spend a majority of its time being a community center.

The problem with the current rules is that while churches will regularly spend over fifty percent of their time doing covered charitable activities, they rarely will spend over fifty percent of their time in any one area. For example, churches regularly educate, visit the sick in hospitals, transport the sick to hospitals, open its facilities to the public for use, host various community programs, provide rehabilitation services such as AA and divorce recovery, house a library and operate clothing and food banks. But a church will rarely do just one of these activities over fifty percent of its time. As it stands now, churches are penalized for being over-charitable in their activities!

As Rep. Smith noted, houses of worship serve vital roles in their communities. And after national disasters, communities need houses of worship to be rebuilt just as much as the other charitable organizations.

Opponents of this bill argued that churches are already covered under FEMA because they can seek loans just like other businesses. The problem with this argument is that churches are more akin to charities than businesses. Churches just can’t raise their price to cover expenses so providing loans is cold comfort for struggling churches.

Other opponents say that houses of worship should not be covered by FEMA grants because of the separation of church and state. But nowhere in the constitution does it permit the government to be hostile to religion and exclude religious organizations from neutral government programs. In fact, in American Atheists, Inc. v. Detroit Downtown Development Authority, , the Sixth Circuit upheld the constitutionality of a grant program that gave money to a church to fix its facilities in light of the upcoming Super Bowl. It does not violate the constitution to allow churches to participate in a neutral government program, on the same terms and conditions as others.

The bottom line is that churches play vital roles in their communities and therefore should be rebuilt after national disasters. Churches are not like businesses and thus are less able to rebuild after national disasters. Churches routinely educate, provide food and clothes for the poor, transport the sick to hospitals, visit the sick in hospitals, allow community groups to use their facilities, operate as community centers, allow performing artists to perform, house libraries, etc. This bill is a wonderful acknowledgment that churches remain vital partners in the community. It also recognizes that the Constitution does not require a radical hostility to religion by the government.

NEW JERSEY AND NEW YORK CHURCHES SHOULD NOT BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST IN DISASTER RELIEF:  CHURCHES ARE ELIGIBLE FOR FEMA GRANTS AND MUST APPLY NOW TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS

A recent article in the New York Times stated that there were constitutional problems with FEMA providing grants to churches that were damaged or destroyed in the wake of Hurricane Sandy.  The article quoted the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State who both argued that churches should not be given grants because to do so would violate the “separation of church and state.”  Once again, this tiresome phrase is being promoted to deny churches equal access to government grants.  The article went on to tell the story of St. George Malankara Orthodox Church of India in New Dorp, Staten Island.  This church suffered an estimated $150,000 in hurricane damage to its basement, windows and doors. When they asked for a grant to help with the rebuilding costs, they were given a clear “No.”

But the New York Times article did not tell the full story.  And the ACLU and AU “experts” it quoted were dead wrong on the law.  Churches cannot be discriminated against in the provision of disaster relief funding.  Churches can, and should apply for FEMA grants.

FEMA provides grants to charitable organizations through its Public Assistance program.    The purpose of this grant program is to allow communities to quickly respond to and recover from major disasters or emergencies declared by the president.  Through these grants, FEMA has provided Federal disaster grant assistance for debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the repair, replacement, or restoration of disaster -damaged facilities of private non-profit organizations.  The program does not specifically exclude churches or other religious organizations.

So if a church is not categorically excluded, how does a church qualify?  To qualify as a private non-profit organization, the organization must operate facilities that are open to the general public and provide services that are otherwise performed by a government agency.  According to FEMA, this specifically includes such organizations as colleges, universities, parochial schools, hospitals, museums, zoos, community centers, libraries, homeless shelters, senior citizen centers, rehabilitation facilities, shelter workshops and facilities that provide health and safety services.

As long as a church provides a service that is “otherwise performed by a government agency”, it should apply for a grant.  Does the church offer education classes?  Does it have a library open to the public?  Then it should fill out a grant application if it has been damaged.  Does it act as a community center where members of the community can come and use the facilities?  Then it would be discriminatory for FEMA to deny the church a grant while giving grants to secular community centers.

The list goes on.  Does the church house Alcoholics Anonymous, or other rehab programs?  Does it offer programs for battered spouses?  Provide transportation to medical facilities?  Offer food programs or a clothing bank?  Run an Upwards basketball program? The reality is that most churches are intimately involved in their communities, and provide such services that are also provided by the government.  Thus, they should be eligible for FEMA grants and should apply.

The deadline for filing for a FEMA grant in New York is January 28, 2013.  The deadline for New Jersey is January 30, 2013.  You can fill out a grant request at this link: http://www.fema.gov/apply-assistance, or call the FEMA Helpline at 1-800-621-3362.

But if you face discrimination or opposition because you are a church or religious organization, contact us at Alliance Defending Freedom and we will assist you in defending your rights.  The bottom line is that churches and other religious organizations cannot be prohibited from equally participating in a government program.   Disaster relief is intended to allow our communities to get back on their feet as quickly as possible.  And churches, as vital partners in those communities, should not be left behind in the wake.

Some people have no shame.  The situation involving the demand to remove the crosses at Camp Pendleton is just such a situation.

About nine years ago, seven Marines erected two crosses in a remote part of the camp, on a hill overlooking the Pacific Ocean.  They did this to help them cope with the gruesome reality of their jobs.  Marines are willing to die so that Americans can enjoy freedom.  But they must not only be willing to sacrifice their lives, but also the emotional well being of their children as well.  When a parent dies, a child suffers.

The job of protecting our freedoms is alone amongst occupations in the magnitude of sacrifice required.

And so when a Marine is preparing him or herself to possibly die for others, he or she must come to grips with their emotional and spiritual self.  That is why militaries have chaplains.  It is simply a requirement of military readiness that Marines and other soldiers be able to deal with the heavy toll that comes with sacrificial employment.

Seven Marines went up that hill to erect the crosses to help them deal with the fact that others had given their lives before them.  Karen Mendoza, a wife of one of the Marines who erected the cross said, “It’s not a religious spot at all, it’s a place for the Marines to grieve and to grow to let go of their burdens of what they had in their soul, so they can go back down that hill and back into battle and put their own lives on the line.”

These crosses were not erected by the military, they were erected by individual Marines.  The government does not maintain these crosses.  Individuals who are ready to die for others are maintaining these crosses.  This is not about the government establishing religion.  This is about Marines personally coming to grips with a job that requires the ultimate sacrifice.

Seven Marines went up to erect this memorial in honor of those who died in service to their country. Four of those seven, Maj. Douglas Zembiec, Maj. Ray Mendoza, Lance Cpl. Aaron Austin and Lance Cpl. Robert Zurheide, have since paid the ultimate price for their country. Austin and Zurheide were killed in Fallujah in 2004. Mendoza was killed in 2005 while leading Marines into combat near the Syrian border. Zembiec was killed in 2007 while leading a raid on insurgents in Baghdad.

But some people know no shame.  The Military Association of Atheists and Freethinkers (MAAF) want the crosses moved and have threatened to sue the Camp if they do not get their way. According to their president Jason Torpy,  ”These Marines were abusing their access to the installation when they went on to it and start[ed] building things”

We, at the Alliance Defense Fund, are offering our services free of charge to the Camp to defend the rights of its Marines to prepare themselves mentally, emotionally, and spiritually, as they prepare themselves to make the ultimate sacrifice.

These Marines died for our freedoms, including the freedom to worship.  Shouldn’t they have those same freedoms?

This tough economy is hitting everyone. From unemployment to Wall Street bailouts to rocketing gas prices, it seems that everyone is hurting for cash. Apparently, local governments are no exception.  Across this nation, local taxing authorities are trying to increase their coffers by denying property tax exemptions for churches. If you are not careful, your church could be next.

One such battle is taking place in Concord, New Hampshire, involving Liberty Assembly of God. Their story should serve as a warning to all.

The church has existed in its current building for more than 15 years. It’s your typical church. It has services on Sunday mornings and Wednesday nights. A music minister leads the people in singing. It runs a food pantry and even has the occasional person who sleeps through the pastor’s sermons.

Unfortunately, this church came upon hard times. Attendance dropped, and consequently, the church was not using every room as it had before. For example, instead of using four rooms for Sunday school classes, they now only needed to use two.

One day, city officials decided to inspect the church to see if it was being used for religious purposes. These officials conducted a room-by-room analysis, even going through the drawers in the rooms! The city was looking for evidence to support its claim that if any single room was not being used for a religious purpose, it should be taxed.

Unfortunately, the city concluded that not all of the rooms were currently being used for a religious purpose, and stripped the church of its full tax exemption. When asked how the city could possibly come to this conclusion, Kathryn Temchack, the city’s director of real estate assessments, said it was because the rooms were not in good order or use. The following are actual quotations from Ms. Temchack’s deposition as to why she denied the tax exemption:

* She testified that, although the storage of a desk and a musical keyboard could serve a religious purpose, the Church’s storage of such items did not serve a religious purpose “because of all the other junk that’s sitting around it.”

* When asked if the cleanliness of how things are stored play a part in determining whether items are being used for a religious purpose, she said, “it could be. I think there would be some kind of order to it if it was being used for a religious purpose, that you would expect to see tables, chairs, religious posters, a cross, an altar, something of that magnitude here that would say that there’s something religious happening. Bibles. I see just a bunch of stuff sitting in a room.”

* When asked if the storage of a keyboard served a religious purpose, she said, “it’s just not so much the storage of the keyboard. It’s the appearance of the area that it’s in. It’s the condition of those rooms, that it just appeared to be not in use or organized for any type of use.”

* When asked if the storage of a box for the PowerPoint projector (used during worship services) could serve a religious purpose, she testified, “I think it’s the condition of this room. If it’s being used for storage, it’s like how would you know? I don’t know how anyone would know where anything was in this room or how you would find anything in this room. It’s the condition of what’s in the room of the property itself. It’s just a bunch of stuff.”

Apparently, Ms. Temchack took seriously her mother’s admonition that cleanliness was next to godliness!
ADF is representing this church, as the city’s actions pose a real danger for churches, especially struggling ones. The danger here is that, at least according to some tax assessors, if a church ceases to use a room for a religious purpose, it can no longer claim a tax exemption for that room. For instance, the city officials in Concord stated that it could tax a church closet if it was not being used for a religious purpose!

The caution for churches is to make sure to use the property God has entrusted to their care. If they don’t, a tax assessor like the one in New Hampshire might very well try to collect some taxes from them.

If your tax exemption is being challenged because the taxing authority does not believe your church’s use of the space serves a religious purpose, or if you have any questions about your legal rights, please contact the Alliance Defense Fund.