Don't Feed the Homeless

[backontrack]

A startling line from the article

Already, the cities of Dallas, Fort Myers, Fla., Gainesville, Fla., Wilmington, N.C., and Atlanta have laws restricting or outright prohibiting the feeding of the homeless. In Fairfax County, Va., homemade meals and meals made in church kitchens may not be distributed to the homeless unless first approved by the county.

So before a church can perform its Christian duty, it must get a government mandate..."nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." Oops.

Churches need to bail out of the 501c3 tax exempt status and get back to biblical New Testament teachings. Render unto caesar, pay their taxes, and kick the government out of their church business.

Good opinion, but it has nothing to do with the bill. Churches would be fined no matter what their stance or practice on taxes.

Amen Brother Caesar you hit the nail on the head!

[backontrack]

A startling line from the article

Already, the cities of Dallas, Fort Myers, Fla., Gainesville, Fla., Wilmington, N.C., and Atlanta have laws restricting or outright prohibiting the feeding of the homeless. In Fairfax County, Va., homemade meals and meals made in church kitchens may not be distributed to the homeless unless first approved by the county.

So before a church can perform its Christian duty, it must get a government mandate..."nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." Oops.

Churches need to bail out of the 501c3 tax exempt status and get back to biblical New Testament teachings. Render unto caesar, pay their taxes, and kick the government out of their church business.

Good opinion, but it has nothing to do with the bill. Churches would be fined no matter what their stance or practice on taxes.

A church involved in the corrupt 501c3 tax exempt status is no longer a "free church", but in essence belongs to the government and in fact is a government organization and comes under the same guidelines as any business entity/organization and the government can dictate anything to the church and make church rules because the church has become greedy and fat and lives off its tax exempt status, and does not pay taxes. On the other hand, a church that renders under caeser, pays its taxes, is a "free church" and the government cannot dictate to the church, and make its rules, because it is already guaranteed under the American Constitution. This was the case in Indiana, where the church refused to go along with the government dictates and the church lost all of it's property; restablished itself as a "free church", and is no longer holding to the government's rules and dictates.

Again, this is irrelevant to the topic. If you want to rant about this issue, please create another topic.

Yep that's right LadyC, but I think it is also important to note why they did not want the feeding of groups of homeless to take place in parks, empty city lots, business parking lots, etc...

One is that the city is encouraging the homeless to seek help from the number of groups, agencies and soup kitchens that are already available.

Also the large groups gathering in parks waiting for outreach food trucks to pull up were monopolizing a public area as a 'tent city', and bringing with them increased crime as well as public health issues due to public defecating.

Families and groups who use the parks could no longer do so and several complaints were made. This also introduced more crime into fairly quiet neighborhoods.

It was not feeding the homeless that was discouraged. If you met someone outside a Walgreens and offered them a sandwich, there was no problem. The problem was saying to several that you would be there at the same time every day with enough sandwiches for a hundred, so spread the word. That was what they were wanting to discourage, unless they had a place and a permit.

I think that also protects the homeless. What if some sicko wanted to hurt these people by handing out poisioned food. With no permit, no identification the creep could possibly get away with it, this way everyone is accountable.

The problem is that it is a pragmatic approach that opens the door for too much. Even if done for good reasons, the fact is it allows the government to step in and tell the Church, "No, you cannot practice what your Savior said to practice because we don't like the potential harm it could cause." The government could easily spend money educating people who are doing this, handing out packets explaining the danger and then offering the alternatives. Or even better, simply police the areas where the reports are coming in instead of waiting around for traffic violators.

This is exactally what the enmey wants, us to argue about it instead of standing up to it! Wake up Church unite under the King!

Edited February 4, 2007 by backontrack

[Axxman]

I am beginning to get the idea that most of you people have never really dealt with homeless people. The VAST MAJORITY of them are lazy, drunken, criminals, with NO regard for decency. You may on occasion meet a homeless person who had a run of bad luck and can't get back on their feet...but by and large there is a reason NONE OF YOU would want a homeless colony anywhere near your home.

I deal with the homeless on a DAILY basis. It is not something I would wish on the weak-willed (or weak-stomached.) The elected officials of the mentioned cities have an obligation to ALL the citizens of their cities...not just the homeless people. The fact of the matter is that anytime you have a large homeless population in an area of your city, crime rate goes up...quality of life goes down. Our government spends millions of dollars in efforts to assist, and provide for the homeless. It is in your best interest, and the cities best interest, that the homeless be dealt with in that capacity. A church (or any other group) that randomly passes out food to the homeless are NOT HELPING solve anything.

If a church group, or individual, truly feels a need to help the homeless then they should volunteer in one the agencies that are certified to assist. The agencies provide more than a drop of food once a week. They provide counseling, medication, shelter, not to mention basic amenities like a haircut and shower.

Sometimes the government isn't out to get you...sometimes they have better ideas (and more money) to accomplish things the right way.

Edited February 4, 2007 by Axxman

[apothanein kerdos]

i think you are reading way more into it than should be there.

it's a rare thing for a permit to be denied.... i suppose it could happen, but in any case, a church is PRIVATE property. and they are not required to get a permit to feed the homeless on the church grounds.

Again, the law leaves open the potential for the government to do what it wants with the Church...deny its permit, deny its right to pick up the Homeless and transport them away from the designated areas, etc. It is like the faith based initiatives that Bush put in place - it allows for the potential of the government to dictate what these places can and cannot do.

I am beginning to get the idea that most of you people have never really dealt with homeless people. The VAST MAJORITY of them are lazy, drunken, criminals, with NO regard for decency. You may on occasion meet a homeless person who had a run of bad luck and can't get back on their feet...but by and large there is a reason NONE OF YOU would want a homeless colony anywhere near your home.

I deal with the homeless on a DAILY basis. It is not something I would wish on the weak-willed (or weak-stomached.) The elected officials of the mentioned cities have an obligation to ALL the citizens of their cities...not just the homeless people. The fact of the matter is that anytime you have a large homeless population in an area of your city, crime rate goes up...quality of life goes down. Our government spends millions of dollars in efforts to assist, and provide for the homeless. It is in your best interest, and the cities best interest, that the homeless be dealt with in that capacity. A church (or any other group) that randomly passes out food to the homeless are NOT HELPING solve anything.

If a church group, or individual, truly feels a need to help the homeless then they should volunteer in one the agencies that are certified to assist. The agencies provide more than a drop of food once a week. They provide counseling, medication, shelter, not to mention basic amenities like a haircut and shower.

Sometimes the government isn't out to get you...sometimes they have better ideas (and more money) to accomplish things the right way.

Okay, and if we look at demographics for crimes, anytime a large Latino or Black population ends up in a neighborhood, there is a higher propensity for crime. Shall we now put a limit on how many Black people or Latinos can move into a certain neighborhood?

The fact is, we cannot approach the law in a pragmatic fashion. Even if this law is meant for lowering crime, because it violates the rights of those that want to help the homeless (regardless of what type of people they are, I do not remember that stipulation in the Bible) it cannot be legitimate or accepted. There must be more acceptable ways of curbing the crime rate without violating civil rights.

[Guest LadyC]

ok, all else aside. we are commanded by God to obey the laws of the land so far as they do not require you to deny His soveriegnty.

if the law says that a church representative is required to fill out a piece of paper before feeding a large group of people in a public area, then as a CHRISTIAN, we need to go fill out that little piece of paper.

or as a congregation, we need to open the doors of our CHURCH BUILDING and offer to feed them on private property. no permit required.

being a christian does NOT give us license to disobey this law.

[apothanein kerdos]

ok, all else aside. we are commanded by God to obey the laws of the land so far as they do not require you to deny His soveriegnty.

if the law says that a church representative is required to fill out a piece of paper before feeding a large group of people in a public area, then as a CHRISTIAN, we need to go fill out that little piece of paper.

or as a congregation, we need to open the doors of our CHURCH BUILDING and offer to feed them on private property. no permit required.

being a christian does NOT give us license to disobey this law.

Yes it does. We are commanded more times by Christ to take care of the poor than we are to witness. I assure you that you would never support a law that required us to get a permit to witness...then why would you support such a law that prevents us from feeing the homeless (again, something Christ tells us to do more than witness)?

[Guest LadyC]

ok, all else aside. we are commanded by God to obey the laws of the land so far as they do not require you to deny His soveriegnty.

if the law says that a church representative is required to fill out a piece of paper before feeding a large group of people in a public area, then as a CHRISTIAN, we need to go fill out that little piece of paper.

or as a congregation, we need to open the doors of our CHURCH BUILDING and offer to feed them on private property. no permit required.

being a christian does NOT give us license to disobey this law.

Yes it does. We are commanded more times by Christ to take care of the poor than we are to witness. I assure you that you would never support a law that required us to get a permit to witness...then why would you support such a law that prevents us from feeing the homeless (again, something Christ tells us to do more than witness)?

baloney. you're implying that God tells us WHERE we are to take care of the poor. God does not, ANYWHERE in scripture, tell us to violate laws that are in place for public protection in order to take care of them. and the law does not ANYWHERE tell us we can not take care of them on private property. the law only requires you submit a form before doing it in public places.

and for the record, i do not oppose laws that require one to submit a form before holding a tent revival in a public place either. there is no law against witnessing to individuals in public OR private.

[apothanein kerdos]

ok, all else aside. we are commanded by God to obey the laws of the land so far as they do not require you to deny His soveriegnty.

if the law says that a church representative is required to fill out a piece of paper before feeding a large group of people in a public area, then as a CHRISTIAN, we need to go fill out that little piece of paper.

or as a congregation, we need to open the doors of our CHURCH BUILDING and offer to feed them on private property. no permit required.

being a christian does NOT give us license to disobey this law.

Yes it does. We are commanded more times by Christ to take care of the poor than we are to witness. I assure you that you would never support a law that required us to get a permit to witness...then why would you support such a law that prevents us from feeing the homeless (again, something Christ tells us to do more than witness)?

baloney. you're implying that God tells us WHERE we are to take care of the poor. God does not, ANYWHERE in scripture, tell us to violate laws that are in place for public protection in order to take care of them. and the law does not ANYWHERE tell us we can not take care of them on private property. the law only requires you submit a form before doing it in public places.

and for the record, i do not oppose laws that require one to submit a form before holding a tent revival in a public place either. there is no law against witnessing to individuals in public OR private.

Then basically you are holding to an inaccurate view (Biblically speaking) of witnessing and taking care of the poor. Again, God commands us to do it - this puts it outside the control of the government. At this point, we are subject to God's laws, not man's laws. You have yet to make a valid argument for your point on this issue - instead you refer to the hyper-literalistic view of, "Well because the Bible doesn't specify, it is allowed." You are reading the Bible in a way it was never intended to be read (letter of the law instead of spirit of the law). The Bible doesn't specify where we can witness either, so I guess it would be okay to set up "witnessing zones" and any door to door, co-worker to co-worker, or even any witnessing that takes place outside of a church would need a permit.

When you let the government put stipulations on the church, even in the slightest form, you give it the right to control the church.

[Guest LadyC]

clearly we don't see eye to eye on this. but i don't appreciate you telling me that i have an inaccurate view of scriptural commands anymore than you will appreciate me saying that you do.

filling out a form does not circumvent our ability to witness or feed. when it does, then you can say you're right and i'm wrong. but until the law says we are not allowed to witness or feed people anywhere, then all you are voicing is your own opinion.

[apothanein kerdos]

filling out a form does not circumvent our ability to witness or feed. when it does, then you can say you're right and i'm wrong. but until the law says we are not allowed to witness or feed people anywhere, then all you are voicing is your own opinion.

Yes it does. Do you understand how a permit works? You have to file a form in order to ask permission from the government to perform a certain action in a designated area. The government then has the option to accept, delay, or deny your request. In essence, the government can and has abused this privilege in the past (such as denying petitions to protest abortion clinics, witness at pregnancy crisis centers, etc).

The fact is, at the point the government tells the church, "You must get our approval before you do this," I have ended up right and you have ended up wrong on this issue. It places the authority of the church in the government's hands and strips it out of God's. It is now up to the government to allow us the right to feed the poor when we so choose and desire, and no longer up to God. It is sacralism, and sacralism always destroys the Church.