Elaine of Portland, ME I second your opinion, Campmom. In addition, I am curious, after apparently 20 years, why now is it an issue? While I understand the need to have zoning laws, I do not understand how they could have been written in a way that allows the Constitution to be trumped. Also, I was dis-heartened if not inflamed,by a letter I read in the Forecaster-written by City Council member Dan Skolnik. While I did not read the letter to which he was replying, I have to say that his words left me wondering what planet he if from. He wrote that the Wilanksy's "have been allowed to flaunt for years" the existing zoning laws.First, I(and I am sure I am not alone in this thought)have never known the Rabbi or anyone in his family to "flaunt" anything. I believe "flout" is the word he meant to use - which means "to ignore or show contempt for a law" - and if practicing your religion in your own home is flouting a zoning law, maybe it is the zoning law that needs changing. And I was insulted by his last sentence that "anti-Semitism and ulterior malice should remain figments of wild imaginations". What does THAT mean? " Remain" - as if anti-Semitism never existed but in the "wild imaginations" of some? 6 million Jews are not proof that unfortunately, anti-Semitism has existed in the past? While I do not necessarily believe this issue has come up due to anti-semitic sentiment, it is such a "wild" idea that it could be the case? I suppose the pieces of paper stapled to telephone poles last year - with neo-Nazi propaganda were figments of our imagination as well.I could go on,but to what end? If you truly wanted us to "maintain perspective", as you put it, maybe you could have kept your thoughts to yourself. Ultimately,it was heartwarming to hear the various speakers come out tonight - before the actual meeting-speakers from many different backgrounds and faiths-to stand in support of securing our freedom to practice religion in the privacy of our own homes!report abuse

Rick of Winslow, ME His religious 'rights' isn't in question necessarily, just the location of his 'church' in a housing development. Although it may not be a particular problem here (other than his neighbor), if anyone were able to turn their home into a church, that could cause problems in many communities. At some point, you'd have to do away with zoning laws.report abuse

gregger of jefferson, ME Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances


Doesn't anybody in portland have a copy of the Constitution ?report abuse

Rick of Winslow, ME I think once you open that door and approve it for this guy, then anyone will be allowed to turn their home into a 'church' and most housing areas could not contend with the traffic and parking problems.report abuse