I don't understand what they did wrong. If they pay rent, just like other groups, and they clean up after themselves, what's the harm?

David, www.RedLetterBelievers.com, "Salt and Light"

They're a Christian group. Doesn't matter if they paid rent like anyone else or cleaned up afterward. The harm is that someone might pay attention to them who might be offended. And, you can bet the Churches didn't get any of their money back they'd already paid. Of course, occupy wallstreet can shut off local businesses, cause layoffs, destroy private property, scream and yell at anyone who disagrees with them and it's no problem. Our tax dollars will clean up after them.

This seems crazy. Any group should be able to rent public spaces. I know in Oregon, many churches rent public schools for church services, and though there have been some questions about it from some outsiders, the practice continues. The churches pay their rent, and schools probably relish the extra income.

This is one of the most frightening news stories we have yet to see reminiscent of steps that Hitler took in the early days of Nazi Germany to turn an entire country against the Jews. Every single Christian in the US needs to speak up and take a stand on this!

this makes no sense. the argument with the renting of schools was that using schools which are government property violated establishment of religion, which was nonsense anyway. This wasnt about teaching religion in classes it is extracurricular. Actually other groups are allowed to meet in schools so it is religious discrimination to ban churches. Same with community centers. It is a discrimination issue and religion is one reason that they are NOT allowed to discriminate This needs to be addressed.

I have run into the same issue in public spaces atriums and businesses where people running them say you can't sleep. Even churches have said this. It is insane. My argument is that sleeping is also praying, because when we pray we often fall asleep and god speaks to usin dreams. SO it is a false distinction. They are really saying we can't pray in these places, and that is religious discrimination.

New York City Pastors are fasting and meeting for five three-hour prayer sessions: http://alturl.com/dyvbh

Pastor Dimas Salaberrios, one of the pastors arrested, has declared that he will not eat until this ruling is overturned.

NY State is also in the process of kicking churches out of public schools. A lot of New York City churches meet in public schools and pay rent. But earlier this year, they were told this was going to come to an end. A court case was filed, and the churches lost. It was appealed to the Supreme Court, but the court denied the case, keeping the prohibition in place.

It's very simple: the court ruled that the NYC government cannot be forced by churches to rent city buildings for worship services. Worship services are different from mere Bible studies and essentially taint the secular nature of government buildings. Also, becauase the evangelical churches admitted that they were not open equally to all members of the public, the churches fail to comply with non-discrimination laws.

The ruling was correct and churches have no right to conduct their services and exclusionary practices on government property.

Lots of misinformation out there, including from CT.

1. Why does CT sensationalize this situation by omitting from its excerpt the fact reported in the linked article -- namely, that the Housing Authority has backed off of its position while it comes up with a policy "in the coming weeks."

2. While it's true that the confusion on this matter apparently stems from the recent US Supreme Court decision not to hear the case of Bronx Household of Faith v. Bd. of Ed. of the City of New York, it's NOT TRUE that the lower court had "ban[ned] religious groups renting space in public schools during the off-hours." Rather, the lower court decision (from the Second Circuit) held that the NYC school board's policy prohibiting the after-hours use of schools for "worship services" or as "a house of worship" did not violate a church's First Amendment rights. In other words, the decision PERMITTED the NY school board to enforce that policy, but the court DID NOT REQUIRE the school board (or any other public entity) to have or enforce such a policy.

While that may not seem like a big difference, it's that difference that apparently caused the confusion with the NYC Housing Authority, when some low-level bureaucrat received word about the court decision and apparently thought it somehow REQUIRED the Housing Authority, a completely separate agency, to follow the policy adopted by the NYC school board.

Note also that the Second Circuit decision DID NOT prohibt ALL uses of the schools by religious organizations. A church can still use the school for prayer, bible study, choir rehearsal, bake sales, and other activities that are not "worship services."

3. @David, Lois and Cornelia -- Because they DON'T "pay rent or clean up after themselves." As the Second Circuit notes, "The Board neither charges rent for use of its space, nor exacts a fee to cover utilities such as electricity, gas, and air conditioning.[fn10 The only fee charged is for the partial cost of custodial work, and for security services when provided by the Board.] The City thus foots a major portion of the costs of the operation of a church."

4. @Kathleen -- While the opinion noted that the church services were not "open on uniform terms to the general public," and that the church prohibited certain people from "participating fully in the servies," the opinion DID NOT find that the church was violating any "non-discrimination laws."

To read about the case, including a link to the Second Circuit decision from which I quoted, go here: scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/the-bronx-household-of-faith-v-board-of-education-of-the-city-of-new-york/

The rationale behind the school case was that schools were not equally available to groups that worshiped on other days, making it look like the gov't was supporting Christian churches. That is hardly the case with the Housing Authority.

Christian Lawyer, thank you. Let's deal with this situation "on the merits" not from hysterics. The real issues are substantial enough. The Housing Authority has obviously made a big mistake and I hope to hear soon that they have backed off. The schools issue is a real one - are you comfortable with any and all kinds of worship in your kids' public school? And if they actually AREN'T paying rent - why not? That's a real issue, too.

Christian leaders are fasting and praying---this is the same way Christians overcame spiritual opposition, and that is what this is---in the first century. I believe they will win this spiritual battle!