Second, irregardless of the need for permitting of a large group (which speaks more to public safety and fair utilization of a public resource than to rights), as individuals and taxpayers we have the right to practice whatever religion we chose in any venue we chose that is either our own, (private) or payed for by our taxes (public) per the first amendment as someone else has already quoted. I can pray, with due respect to the rights of others, in either place as an individual and would expect (and demand if the case arose) them to respect my rights in turn (assuming I know them).
I cannot, as a member of an organized religious group that pays no taxes, participate in an activity that would be interpreted by law as a religious ceremony, religious instruction, or indoctrination, nor can I post or display religious artifacts or text in the context of such ceremony, while on public land or in a public building, or when acting as an agent of the state (i.e. teacher, judge, police officer, etc.).
As per my example, if this same group were to gather in the same venue to discuss the impact of the recent Healthcare act (aka Obamacare) on their organization or in relation to their beliefs and did not participate in any ceremony other than a moment for private individual prayer, then they do not run afoul of the first amendment establishment clause of the constitution and are well within their rights of free speech and assembly (assuming proper permits were obtained of course).
Thirdly, and more being picky than anything, first amendment right to assembly covers the "mob mentality" you speak of. To join with others of like mind or like concern for political discourse or protest should the need arise is one of the cornerstones to uphold and maintain the other rights. Fortunately, with the flourishing of the internet it presents a much harder challenge for any government to prevent such "assembly" from occurring. Huzzah for us.
Lastly, and most importantly, it is only illegal if they get caught by a duly sworn officer of the state, or are reported by an individual(s) who is willing to testify or make sworn statement to such activity, and it is interpreted as such by the judiciary in a court of law. Otherwise, legally it never happened. If you want your rights upheld, first learn what they are (and I mean really learn what they are), and then exercise them.
At least that is how I would interpret it, but I am certainly not a constitutional lawyer.
Post #127 is spot on. It matchs my own experiance with these matters.
I sure wish someone would start violating my lefts. They feel inadequate and unloved.
What you do with your lefts is your own business. Please keep them to yourself.Originally Posted by Coffee Rules!:1326985
Explain to me how a right exists if a permit can either be approved or denied. Our founders believed our rights were unalienable, which means they cannot be taken away. You can come up with all kinds of creative explanations for denying people their rights...people do it all the time...and as they do it they pretend to uphold them. I've learned to tell the difference.