A resourceful group opposed to the 210 foot high, 88,000 square foot temple in Heber City with 454 parking spaces has a novel approach to fighting the monstrosity planned for their single family/agriculture zone neighborhood.

While the group, Save Wasatch Back Dark Skies, acknowledges that conditional use zoning may allow for churches and temples, that the LDS temple should be classified as "club, limited membership".

I can see their point, can you?

They're not wrong. For tax purposes, England views Mormon temples in pretty much the same manner.

I wonder what the neighbors think when they find out how high the club dues are?

This brings up a question. If one is homeless and penniless and therefore not required to pay tithing, would that allow one to join the church and do temple work all day in order to keep warm?

Bednar is adamant about showing up at the temple in fancy dress so that might present a problem.

By "fancy dress," do you mean "in costume," or in a tuxedo? IOW, are you talking like a Brit, or like an American. Sorry. I'm old and things confuse me.

Like the Zoramites of old, you are supposed to at least wear your sunday best.

Temples are a private club or a fraternity. They aren’t open to the general public or even all church members. You have to be approved to enter the club and pay dues. I think differentiating temples as private clubs vs a public church service building is valid.

Definitely a private club.

Around here, sometimes voting locations are in fire stations, libraries, grocery stores....or church lobbies. I cast a ballot once at a Baptist church where the congregation's primary language is not English.

No LDS Temple would permit non-TR holders (regular citizenry) one step inside to cast a ballot in a democratic election.

>> Does an LDS temple meet the definition of a church or temple? <<

Great and spacious building.