Just guessing, but roughly a thousand miles, more or less. Couple three days Greyhound, my church could be there.
Sorry-I thought you might be directly involved with that group.
Looking into nearby churches that could open their doors to feed the homeless. we have Unity Church Of The Triangle next to the park itself, and within a few blocks of the park we have Raleigh Anglican Fellowship, Mt. Sinai Holy Church Of America, Dave Street Presbyterian Church, and the United House Of Prayer.
The surprise enforcement could have been started by, perhaps, the police chief who may have political aspirations and decided the political climate of the state indicated that now would be a good time for him to do this.
My eloquence escapes me this morning so please forgive if this comes off as sweeping or otherwise incompletely descriptive of Them Homeless: the crazy people I know (I’m thinking of 8 individuals at the moment) really get thrown when their routine is interrupted. Not thrown as in, “Huh, line at Starbucks is a bit long this morning, guess I’ll just go to McDonalds,” but thrown as in, “WHHHAARRRRR!!! That’s it! This is it! They’re trying to starve us! Next step is they give us all $250 and bus tickets to Las Vegas but we end up in a concentration camp in New Mexico! And if we don’t go willingly, they’ll drug the food and ship us off there while we’re unconscious!” That sounded like hyperbole. It wasn’t. It’s my son in 20 years.
My point: It’s not just mean to make people stay hungry, sometimes it’s beyond cruel to interrupt someone’s already fragile schedule.
Those churches could, but they don’t. Now what?
The police chief in Raleigh is not a him. She’s only been in the job for eight months, and from her public statements thus far, she doesn’t sound like someone who would initiate a crackdown on the homeless.
Hence the “perhaps” - it didn’t have to be the mayor or city council behind a law enforcement issue. It sounds heartening that, so far at least, it doesn’t appear to be anyone high up in the government behind those actions and thus probably not a shift in overall attitude.
I can’t seem to find out if any of the churches I listed are among the ones that work with Love Wins Ministries to feed the homeless.
They still need a permit to do this in the park though? Or has that been waived or granted permanently?
(Around here you need a permit to have more than 50 people at a park event, family picnic or otherwise.)
What a completely biased article that was. The moron that wrote it apparently didn’t bother to read the article in his own paper that he cited. The cuts were made to reduce the burden of debt on every taxpayer in the state.
But hey, who cares about facts when you get to run your mouth about the ebbul ol’ wascally wepublicans?
What’s that you say? It would reduce the burden on taxpayers? Well, that changes everything!
And I’m sure the increase in business taxes was just as financially devastating as reducing unemployment benefits.
I think he’s amusing. I hate pithy, especially with frogs. And your whiteout is chicken shit just like real chickenshit.:dubious:
Flatlined, I want you to understand the reason behind my earlier satire. Too often the reason behinds these type of ordinances are the same as ordinances enacted when a municipality has too many raccoons. I was satirizing the dehumanizing aspect. Which, I think, is apropos.
I daresay the latter would prefer some variation of poisoning pigeons in the park.
I find luci brilliant.
On some boards that would result in instant perma-banning so fast it would make you blink.
There were similar complaints about the loaves and fishes.
I do.
Must resist… Political jibe… Re…
Sound like some real rouugh and tumble boards. It was just a little joke. If you find “jesus is my favourite jewboy” brilliant then I am happy to not be amusing to you.
Don’t read 'em. Name is right up top there. My posts pour sand in your panties, pick up your little basket and skip along, skip along. Problem solved.
So was restricting voting the moment the Supreme Court struck down the Voting Rights act and hiding abortion regulations in a motorcycle bill also to reduce the burden of debt on taxpayers?
My curious bump is itching. Don’t get it, don’t like it when I don’t get it.
On my screen, that part was invisible, only saw it because the “quote” thingy reveals code. Does that mean its the same for everybody else, they don’t see those “white” words because they are invisible?
First, why would anybody do that, if it means your words won’t be read. Simpler to just not type them, yes? And second, why would anybody care if you did? I mean, I can see how someone might be mildly perplexed, but banned?
I didn’t see it, and wouldn’t have noticed if you hadn’t mentioned it. I don’t make a habit of selecting posts with my mouse to search for hidden clues, but maybe I should start.
As to why, I can’t say. I’m with Socrates: the unexamined snark is not worth giving.