Isn't it funny, as an atheist, to be cheering on a church? Toms River has voted for the Republican presidential candidate for decades. Which means many of them must think they are Good Christians (TM). We should spam them all with this Key & Peele video: https://youtu.be/asnQGz7BdfI?si=R-eVElKuifWu918b
It's not really about cheering on a church. It's about cheering on people trying to help other people, regardless of their motivation. It's about maintaining the First Amendment Wall.
Joe, I agree. When Churches behave like community service, as they should, they are an asset to the community. There is an abundance of churches promoting hate instead and they should have tax exempt status removed.
Fewer but better serving churches and community service centers outside of religion would be best.
I have a problem with a church making a profit. Mostly I want churches to play by the same rules as secular charities. Political arm a separate org that pays taxes, must file paperwork of expenditures with IRS to prove charity over and above reasonable costs.
Me too but they do make obscene profits with zero oversight, accountability or audits like other not for profits. They are businesses claiming to be not for profits.
About the same time that empathy and compassion became no-nos. That one really stunned me, never mind the books that have come out against those qualities.
Right? It's astounding to me that someone would write a book denouncing compassion and/or empathy. Of all the insane things. Let alone that there'd be more than one. These books seem almost like weird creepy manifests by psychopaths/sociopaths or something. Along the lines of those writings by domestic terrorists. I mean, I haven't read any snippets of their stuff, nor do I care to, the titles pretty much say all I need to know.
Yeah, it IS a bit unusual, but I'm with you in cheering them on, especially when the city council are so obviously the bad guys that a blind man could see it with a cane.
Religion and morality are not mutually exclusive, but they are far from the same thing. In this case, the church in question appears to be both religious and moral.
When a religious organistion is doing good, cheer them on for doing good. And if you have the skills, the time and the willingness to help out consider doing so.
Where, then, would it be fair to build a homeless shelter? In someone elses's back yard? In an industrial park? I know where you want it built. In the "poor" neighborhood. You just don't want a daily reminder that poor people exist.
What those Toms River people DON'T want is a "poor neighborhood." Thing is, properly executed, the homeless shelter that the Christ Episcopal Church proposes would not at all necessarily create such an environment.
But some people just gots to have their pickleball, I guess. 😝
Exactly Troublesh00ter! I have a homeless shelter going up in my neighborhood. It’s a pilot program to take in homeless, job train them, give them a studio apartment in what used to be an eyesore of a motel, while they are being trained. I see it as an improvement to the neighborhood because there will be on site 24/7 psychology professionals and occasional on site doctor visits. Money well spent. If it succeeds, every ward in Chicago will have one. There are 50 wards in Chicago.
Yes, a homeless shelter will draw in more homeless people. That doesn’t necessarily mean that these people will do harm. Your bigotry is what is harming the community. Your assumption of personal failings of homeless people are what’s causing issues.
Homeless shelters also improve the area by getting the homeless off the streets.
And if you want to forget, I will remind you that no matter how good you think you have it, you have more in common with a homeless person than you do a billionaire. You are also more likely to experience homelessness. What is it, three lost paychecks away from homelessness but never three good paychecks from becoming a millionaire or billionaire. And the way the USA is going, the billionaires are trying to get your three paychecks. These folks may be begging for a homeless shelter soon.
Well said! 👏🏼👏🏼 I had a co-worker who used to collect unused travel products to make kits for the homeless. She always said that a good many people are just a few steps away from being homeless and personal care products make a person feel normal in a tough situation.
To all the Christian Nazionalists who think that Hemant hates religion:
This article is a prime example of the fact that Hemant does not, in fact, hate religion. Most of the regular commenters here ware very likely to actually support this church in its fight to provide help to the homeless. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵. Helping people, without regard to any sort of religious affiliation. Hell, this is a 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰 church, part of an organization for which we regularly show our disdain.
What we want is not for religion to be prohibited, or otherwise forced to end. We want to be generally left alone, without religious dogma forced upon us. We want the wall of separation between church and state to be strengthened. The government punishing a church by taking its property by eminent domain is as harmful to that wall as mandatory bible readings in school.
I misspoke. It isn't a Catholic church, it's Epicopalian. No wonder they are trying to show compassion, it's the same sect as Bishop Budde. Regardless, it is people trying to genuinely help people. Something I approve of, no matter what the underlying motivation.
Looking at the map of Toms River, I can see this church sits on very prime real estate. The house directly across the street is worth about $1.2 million, according to Zillow. The surrounding houses are around 3/4 of a mil while a couple of blocks away on the river are houses that are over $2.4 mil. Surrounding the property on 2 sides is the Toms River Country Club (a private club that does not list the price for membership on its website). I suspect this city council has been trying to find a way to grab this property for years because the church does not pay tax on it. Of course, they couldn't just grab it under the Kelo ruling to give to someone who will pay tax because that would be a really bad look and, as noted, illegal for other reasons. This is going to end up being another example of the rich and powerful getting what they want over the needs of others. The city may not take the church, because they can't, but they will rule against a shelter because the poor and downtrodden are not welcome in the US of A. Almost half the nation voted for a bully who always 'wins' because they don't want to be 'losers'. Seeing 'losers', aka homeless people, reminds them that the crushing debt they ran up to have the illusion of 'winning' is always hanging over their heads.
The church btw has been in Toms River since 1865 though the current church building only to 1962 (not clear whether it was built on property they've owned for far longer). It is openly supportive of LGBTQ+ and has a Spanish as well as English services as well as supporting those who are homeless.
Also apparently Toms River has been involved in other church/state arguments
"Toms River has been under investigation in the past by the federal Justice Department under RLUIPA for its 10-acre zoning for houses of worship in certain zones, and paid a settlement of $122,500 to the Chabad Jewish Center of Toms River in 2020 as a result of one probe. In a separate case, the township agreed to return the zoning to the 2-acre parcels that had been in place for more than 40 years in 2021 in a settlement with the Justice Department — a settlement Rodrick vocally opposed." https://patch.com/new-jersey/tomsriver/toms-river-takes-1st-step-eminent-domain-against-church
Another issue that draws the NIMBY arguments is building prisons. The same arguments are used, it draws more criminals to the area, it brings down property values, blah blah blah. Well, I lived blocks away from a federal prison in Denver (it housed at least one infamous prisoner when I lived there) for several years. The area wasn’t inundated with criminals, the businesses in the area were not negatively affected by the prison, property values grew inline with the rest of Denver, overall it wasn’t the terrible, life threatening situation NIMBYs make it out to be.
There’s a park on the east side of Madison that has a lot of homeless people (mainly men and mainly white but not entirely) that you can see the tent city from the street. Or you could, because the city decided to build a shelter for the men, near the park. Now there are still the odd homeless person setup around the park, but it isn’t as bad as it was a few years ago before the shelter, and the panhandlers are always on certain corners. But the big encampment was moved, the folks needing it have been provided opportunities to improve, and many of them have. Sure some have issues that require more work, but they’re getting the help they need to move up. The loose homeless people eventually find their way to the shelter as space opens up. The entire area has benefited from the shelter. It’s cleaner, safer and the folks being served are healthier. It’s not a miracle cure, it doesn’t solve the systemic issues causing homelessness, but it is a benefit. The community is better for it.
NIMBY is really about elitism and bigotry, not about the concerns they raise because those concerns are not the reality.
Speaking of prisons, the Moron-in-Chief has said that he's going to re-open Alcatraz. I've been there, they'll have to tear it down and build a new prison. And it was originally shutdown because it was too expensive to ship repair supplies and food by boat to the island.
We already know none of this is about cutting spending. It’s about control, hurting the others, getting away with crime and corruption, and revenge. Alcatraz is notorious and it has a film history, that’s all Trump cares about. He knows its name, I bet he can’t name any other prison, so he probably said something about sending a perceived enemy to Alcatraz and an aide told him it was closed, so he started yapping about opening it up again. And now it’s a new pet project in his demented mind. The costs aren’t important, just the name recognition and all that goes with it.
Some on the council want to "resolve" the problem of homeless people sleeping on benches, by building a park, with benches. Geniuses, the whole lot 🙄
"My house is wood,” she argued"
Lady, it's 21th century USA, not 1st CE Rome. There is materials available to protect your house, and you live in a wealthy neighbourhood, meaning you certainly have the means to afford them.
My house is wood. There have been people smoking in my house and on my property. It hasn't had a fire in the 175 years it has been standing. Racist MAGA Karen's house is not in danger.
“My house is wood.” Sounds like MAGAT-speak to me…something that might ooze out of AnusMouthPantLoad’s tangerine countenance. She may have meant to say, “My house and head are wood.”
My uncle's péniche was not in wood, yet it caught fire with an electrical spark. If another péniche navigating late didn't sounded their horn repetitively, we wouldn't have known before it was too late to disengage ours.
Oh, I guarantee you that if this is their response to someone wanting to build a homeless shelter, they're the same sort of people who'd outfit all the local benches, overpasses, and stoops with 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 crimes against humanity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
Well... if they were capable of that degree of foresight, they'd be out there solving 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 problems instead of coming up with new ways to kick people while they're down.
Some of the designs for these things seem more intended to 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 unwelcoming than to actually be a functional deterrent. Nothing new, I suppose. Our society has vast experience in passive-aggressively making 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴 feel like they don't belong.
Plus people were much more likely to set themselves on fire by smoking in bed, of all things, than anyone else. Modern cigarettes have a lot of chemicals in them to retard the flame, make it go out, if left unattended. You know, for safety.
I'm not a big fan of organized religion, but this time, I'm on the side of the church. They are doing the right thing. The government and the residents are a bunch of bigots, racists, and elitists.
It's actually understandable to have concerns. But they need to be informed about IMPROVED safety, when people aren’t on the streets and desperate.The church should discuss details of their plan with the neighborhood. Some homeless are very psychologically disturbed. The church should address this with the community. That's what had to be done in Chicago. Ours is NOT being implemented a churches but rather the city. Do some people still scream? Of course.
We have a program in Newark called “The Pathway Home,” which is to end homelessness in Newark in a three-year period. We’re about 1.5 years in and we have cut it by 55 percent or so.
We use transitional housing (converted packing containers, the design by NJIT architecture students) in three Hope Villages, which are privately funded. They include medical care, drug, alcohol, and mental health counseling, career training assistance, permanent housing assistance, and clothing donations. We have street teams that pick up homeless folks to get them to our Hope Villages.
It’s a struggle…we have to deal with people who suffer from severe physical and mental issues, alcoholism, and drug addictions, who are unwilling to take advantage of the services offered. We also have the problem of people coming from New York and other cities with homelessness issues who take over the sidewalk grates and halls in Penn Station.
The difference is that we are working together with all kinds of organizations, public and private, profit and non-profit, to address this in a holistic manner. It’s the only way to cope with a situation like this. You have to go all-in.
Paula Leotta: "I am not a racist." Sure, Jan. Nothing in the report here mentioned the ethnic diversity of the unhoused population. The mere assumption that the "poor" that would be served aren't all lily white like you is inherently racist.
Imagine her surpirise if I, a white male, related my homeless experiences to her. No drugs or littering involved and I managed to stay clean. While I was searching for work, people found it hard to believe I was homeless just by looking at me
Yes, the same thing happened to me back in the late 80s/early 90s. I was a middle-aged white, college-educated, non-drug using woman who happened to be unhoused. Occasionally I'd sleep sitting up on a park bench, occasionally elsewhere. Nobody I talked to believed me when I mentioned I was homeless, even when things went even more sideways and I sheltered in an abandoned building. I just somehow didn't fit people's stereotype. And, mind, that wasn't the first time. I graduated college in the mid-70s, in the middle of the Ford Recession (which most people don't even know was a thing.) I wasn't the only recent college graduate sleeping on the floor of an abandoned, falling-apart house in the small college town I couldn't afford to leave or live in. None of us "looked" unhoused, but we essentially were.
Realistically, being homeless is expensive. I held down a job while homeless many years ago; yes, it was a fast food job, but it was gainful employment. It just wasn't enough pay for me to be able to actually get shelter for myself; I won't go into detail, but I doubt seriously I'm the only person that's ever happened to.
Definitely. During both of the periods of homelessness I noted above, I had gainful employment. As with you, I simply did not make enough from those various jobs (none of them were fast food) to keep a reasonable roof over my head, food in my stomach, pay for heating and electricity, and for transportation (no car.) The other unhoused or marginally housed people I knew were in the same situation. I clearly remember walking the streets of several cities, stopping at every place that looked like a business, asking for work. A lot of the responses were "no" because I was older and college-educated. Some told me explicitly that I was "overqualified" and the employers didn't want me influencing their younger, more poorly-paid employees. They'd rather I was on the streets... and then bitched and moaned to Silly Hall about the homeless population. (Still do.)
Most people have no appreciation for how close they themselves are to homelessness. The majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. It only takes 60-90 days with no money coming in to cause massive upheavals in a family’s life. I’ve walked that line due to health issues that deprived me of my livelihood. It can happen to anyone, yet, we treat the homeless like pariahs. This is what a broken society looks like.
NOGODZ20, I chat online with someone who is homeless. Incredibly Intelligent! There really is a horrible stereotype associated with it because people witness some very psychologically damaged people on public transportation etc. They need psychological care, not just a temp home & job training. Others are simply in a bad circumstance. Medical costs can render someone bankrupt and homeless in the US of A! That’s the real disgrace.
DM once saw a homeless man without shoes in winter. She gave him money and a little while later, she mentally slapped herself "Why didn't ask him to go and buy shoes ?"
She helped countless homeless people throughout the decades she lived, as long they were not aggressive.
Me too. I was in a shelter & did my nails, my hair, & put on makeup every single day, so I didn't "look" homeless at all, ever. This was in Brooklyn & I was ill. I became disabled around 2000. It was a wild & crazy time before I got worse. Now my makeup just sits in the case waiting for me. Not into drugs or anything like that either. I wasn't interested in that. Just really wanted to figure out how to manage my life & get a place to live. The rest is a much longer story that I may make a post about at some point.
This is what I would like to see churches do. We can coexist with religious organizations like this one. Those mega boom boom evangelical churches are the one ruining our nation.
“Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're fucked.”
This is just one more symptom of localities having to make difficult decisions with limited resources because the federal government — with its HUGE resources — is refusing to spend them on actual human beings with actual human needs. Why should there even BE homeless people in the richest society in the history of history?
Isn't it funny, as an atheist, to be cheering on a church? Toms River has voted for the Republican presidential candidate for decades. Which means many of them must think they are Good Christians (TM). We should spam them all with this Key & Peele video: https://youtu.be/asnQGz7BdfI?si=R-eVElKuifWu918b
It's not really about cheering on a church. It's about cheering on people trying to help other people, regardless of their motivation. It's about maintaining the First Amendment Wall.
Joe, I agree. When Churches behave like community service, as they should, they are an asset to the community. There is an abundance of churches promoting hate instead and they should have tax exempt status removed.
Fewer but better serving churches and community service centers outside of religion would be best.
I think any church that can't show that all of its profits are going to help the community, should pay taxes.
I have a problem with a church making a profit. Mostly I want churches to play by the same rules as secular charities. Political arm a separate org that pays taxes, must file paperwork of expenditures with IRS to prove charity over and above reasonable costs.
Me too but they do make obscene profits with zero oversight, accountability or audits like other not for profits. They are businesses claiming to be not for profits.
Exactly, Joe. When did helping each other become such an intolerable act?
About the same time that empathy and compassion became no-nos. That one really stunned me, never mind the books that have come out against those qualities.
Right? It's astounding to me that someone would write a book denouncing compassion and/or empathy. Of all the insane things. Let alone that there'd be more than one. These books seem almost like weird creepy manifests by psychopaths/sociopaths or something. Along the lines of those writings by domestic terrorists. I mean, I haven't read any snippets of their stuff, nor do I care to, the titles pretty much say all I need to know.
Yeah, it IS a bit unusual, but I'm with you in cheering them on, especially when the city council are so obviously the bad guys that a blind man could see it with a cane.
Religion and morality are not mutually exclusive, but they are far from the same thing. In this case, the church in question appears to be both religious and moral.
Hmmm.... Matthew 25 is a bit of a tall order as is Luke 18, 22 but if you want to join the club you should read the rules first.
When a religious organistion is doing good, cheer them on for doing good. And if you have the skills, the time and the willingness to help out consider doing so.
"𝐼 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑚𝑒 𝑎 𝑁𝐼𝑀𝐵𝑌, 𝐼 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢 𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑔𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑚𝑒 𝑎 𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑠𝑡. 𝐼 𝑎𝑚 𝑛𝑜𝑡, 𝐼 𝑎𝑚 𝑎 𝑡𝑎𝑥𝑝𝑎𝑦𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝐼 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑑𝑜𝑛’𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑘 𝑖𝑡’𝑠 𝑓𝑎𝑖𝑟," 𝑠𝑎𝑖𝑑 𝑃𝑎𝑢𝑙𝑎 𝐿𝑒𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑎.
Ms Leotta:
Where, then, would it be fair to build a homeless shelter? In someone elses's back yard? In an industrial park? I know where you want it built. In the "poor" neighborhood. You just don't want a daily reminder that poor people exist.
What those Toms River people DON'T want is a "poor neighborhood." Thing is, properly executed, the homeless shelter that the Christ Episcopal Church proposes would not at all necessarily create such an environment.
But some people just gots to have their pickleball, I guess. 😝
Exactly Troublesh00ter! I have a homeless shelter going up in my neighborhood. It’s a pilot program to take in homeless, job train them, give them a studio apartment in what used to be an eyesore of a motel, while they are being trained. I see it as an improvement to the neighborhood because there will be on site 24/7 psychology professionals and occasional on site doctor visits. Money well spent. If it succeeds, every ward in Chicago will have one. There are 50 wards in Chicago.
Well said Joe!
Yes, a homeless shelter will draw in more homeless people. That doesn’t necessarily mean that these people will do harm. Your bigotry is what is harming the community. Your assumption of personal failings of homeless people are what’s causing issues.
Homeless shelters also improve the area by getting the homeless off the streets.
And if you want to forget, I will remind you that no matter how good you think you have it, you have more in common with a homeless person than you do a billionaire. You are also more likely to experience homelessness. What is it, three lost paychecks away from homelessness but never three good paychecks from becoming a millionaire or billionaire. And the way the USA is going, the billionaires are trying to get your three paychecks. These folks may be begging for a homeless shelter soon.
Well said! 👏🏼👏🏼 I had a co-worker who used to collect unused travel products to make kits for the homeless. She always said that a good many people are just a few steps away from being homeless and personal care products make a person feel normal in a tough situation.
Exactly! ☝🏽
To all the Christian Nazionalists who think that Hemant hates religion:
This article is a prime example of the fact that Hemant does not, in fact, hate religion. Most of the regular commenters here ware very likely to actually support this church in its fight to provide help to the homeless. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵. Helping people, without regard to any sort of religious affiliation. Hell, this is a 𝗖𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰 church, part of an organization for which we regularly show our disdain.
What we want is not for religion to be prohibited, or otherwise forced to end. We want to be generally left alone, without religious dogma forced upon us. We want the wall of separation between church and state to be strengthened. The government punishing a church by taking its property by eminent domain is as harmful to that wall as mandatory bible readings in school.
I misspoke. It isn't a Catholic church, it's Epicopalian. No wonder they are trying to show compassion, it's the same sect as Bishop Budde. Regardless, it is people trying to genuinely help people. Something I approve of, no matter what the underlying motivation.
OTOH, Catholic and Espiscopalian are virtually the same. :)
Per Robin Williams, "same religion, half the guilt!"
Looking at the map of Toms River, I can see this church sits on very prime real estate. The house directly across the street is worth about $1.2 million, according to Zillow. The surrounding houses are around 3/4 of a mil while a couple of blocks away on the river are houses that are over $2.4 mil. Surrounding the property on 2 sides is the Toms River Country Club (a private club that does not list the price for membership on its website). I suspect this city council has been trying to find a way to grab this property for years because the church does not pay tax on it. Of course, they couldn't just grab it under the Kelo ruling to give to someone who will pay tax because that would be a really bad look and, as noted, illegal for other reasons. This is going to end up being another example of the rich and powerful getting what they want over the needs of others. The city may not take the church, because they can't, but they will rule against a shelter because the poor and downtrodden are not welcome in the US of A. Almost half the nation voted for a bully who always 'wins' because they don't want to be 'losers'. Seeing 'losers', aka homeless people, reminds them that the crushing debt they ran up to have the illusion of 'winning' is always hanging over their heads.
Thank you. That saved me a lot of work.
The church btw has been in Toms River since 1865 though the current church building only to 1962 (not clear whether it was built on property they've owned for far longer). It is openly supportive of LGBTQ+ and has a Spanish as well as English services as well as supporting those who are homeless.
Also apparently Toms River has been involved in other church/state arguments
"Toms River has been under investigation in the past by the federal Justice Department under RLUIPA for its 10-acre zoning for houses of worship in certain zones, and paid a settlement of $122,500 to the Chabad Jewish Center of Toms River in 2020 as a result of one probe. In a separate case, the township agreed to return the zoning to the 2-acre parcels that had been in place for more than 40 years in 2021 in a settlement with the Justice Department — a settlement Rodrick vocally opposed." https://patch.com/new-jersey/tomsriver/toms-river-takes-1st-step-eminent-domain-against-church
https://scontent-ord5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/495085231_621673994233636_117507942970675026_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=S6VsUXMacwAQ7kNvwFDtN0w&_nc_oc=AdkTr_5ypo42-1JZsmACWoqUToqRGG2QpA4UWPymY18eV8HawIuamT9UE_OTzPu0SuI&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent-ord5-2.xx&_nc_gid=eTv8yF0X-6YtEw6cwxczAw&oh=00_AfH-zP-SqxJ3HmpF0QBUwdQReQglkr_00vTVXMvW8ctKeQ&oe=681EBDE7
For a religion that supposedly has "love thy neighbor" as a central tenet, why is it churches that love their neighbor like that are incredibly rare?
Another issue that draws the NIMBY arguments is building prisons. The same arguments are used, it draws more criminals to the area, it brings down property values, blah blah blah. Well, I lived blocks away from a federal prison in Denver (it housed at least one infamous prisoner when I lived there) for several years. The area wasn’t inundated with criminals, the businesses in the area were not negatively affected by the prison, property values grew inline with the rest of Denver, overall it wasn’t the terrible, life threatening situation NIMBYs make it out to be.
There’s a park on the east side of Madison that has a lot of homeless people (mainly men and mainly white but not entirely) that you can see the tent city from the street. Or you could, because the city decided to build a shelter for the men, near the park. Now there are still the odd homeless person setup around the park, but it isn’t as bad as it was a few years ago before the shelter, and the panhandlers are always on certain corners. But the big encampment was moved, the folks needing it have been provided opportunities to improve, and many of them have. Sure some have issues that require more work, but they’re getting the help they need to move up. The loose homeless people eventually find their way to the shelter as space opens up. The entire area has benefited from the shelter. It’s cleaner, safer and the folks being served are healthier. It’s not a miracle cure, it doesn’t solve the systemic issues causing homelessness, but it is a benefit. The community is better for it.
NIMBY is really about elitism and bigotry, not about the concerns they raise because those concerns are not the reality.
Speaking of prisons, the Moron-in-Chief has said that he's going to re-open Alcatraz. I've been there, they'll have to tear it down and build a new prison. And it was originally shutdown because it was too expensive to ship repair supplies and food by boat to the island.
And it was shut down by Brainworm Bob's dad in 1962.
Correction: Ordered shut down in 1962 by RFK, but officially closed in 1963.
We already know none of this is about cutting spending. It’s about control, hurting the others, getting away with crime and corruption, and revenge. Alcatraz is notorious and it has a film history, that’s all Trump cares about. He knows its name, I bet he can’t name any other prison, so he probably said something about sending a perceived enemy to Alcatraz and an aide told him it was closed, so he started yapping about opening it up again. And now it’s a new pet project in his demented mind. The costs aren’t important, just the name recognition and all that goes with it.
He just wants another island fortress he can ship undesirables to away from prying eyes and news cameras.
Yeah, criminals, as a rule, want to stay as far away from prisons as possible.
*Facepalm*
Some on the council want to "resolve" the problem of homeless people sleeping on benches, by building a park, with benches. Geniuses, the whole lot 🙄
"My house is wood,” she argued"
Lady, it's 21th century USA, not 1st CE Rome. There is materials available to protect your house, and you live in a wealthy neighbourhood, meaning you certainly have the means to afford them.
My house is wood. There have been people smoking in my house and on my property. It hasn't had a fire in the 175 years it has been standing. Racist MAGA Karen's house is not in danger.
“My house is wood.” Sounds like MAGAT-speak to me…something that might ooze out of AnusMouthPantLoad’s tangerine countenance. She may have meant to say, “My house and head are wood.”
My uncle's péniche was not in wood, yet it caught fire with an electrical spark. If another péniche navigating late didn't sounded their horn repetitively, we wouldn't have known before it was too late to disengage ours.
Did Adrian Paul have a nearby péniche?
There was only one.
Not yet 🤣
Edit : plus, residential and work péniches don't park in the same areas.
Now I know what a peniche is. 😊
https://youtu.be/GldgZFE4u-Y?si=lghcWZBiPdeneE8f
Gimme dat log!
It’s Log!
Oh, I guarantee you that if this is their response to someone wanting to build a homeless shelter, they're the same sort of people who'd outfit all the local benches, overpasses, and stoops with 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 crimes against humanity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
https://cdn.britannica.com/40/258540-050-2B2FE6AF/hostile-architecture-bench-in-park.jpg
One could lie down/sleep UNDER that bench.
Well... if they were capable of that degree of foresight, they'd be out there solving 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 problems instead of coming up with new ways to kick people while they're down.
I actually meant it as a way for homeless people to defeat the purpose of hostile architecture. 😀
Some of the designs for these things seem more intended to 𝘭𝘰𝘰𝘬 unwelcoming than to actually be a functional deterrent. Nothing new, I suppose. Our society has vast experience in passive-aggressively making 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴 feel like they don't belong.
Plus people were much more likely to set themselves on fire by smoking in bed, of all things, than anyone else. Modern cigarettes have a lot of chemicals in them to retard the flame, make it go out, if left unattended. You know, for safety.
I'm not a big fan of organized religion, but this time, I'm on the side of the church. They are doing the right thing. The government and the residents are a bunch of bigots, racists, and elitists.
It's actually understandable to have concerns. But they need to be informed about IMPROVED safety, when people aren’t on the streets and desperate.The church should discuss details of their plan with the neighborhood. Some homeless are very psychologically disturbed. The church should address this with the community. That's what had to be done in Chicago. Ours is NOT being implemented a churches but rather the city. Do some people still scream? Of course.
We have a program in Newark called “The Pathway Home,” which is to end homelessness in Newark in a three-year period. We’re about 1.5 years in and we have cut it by 55 percent or so.
We use transitional housing (converted packing containers, the design by NJIT architecture students) in three Hope Villages, which are privately funded. They include medical care, drug, alcohol, and mental health counseling, career training assistance, permanent housing assistance, and clothing donations. We have street teams that pick up homeless folks to get them to our Hope Villages.
It’s a struggle…we have to deal with people who suffer from severe physical and mental issues, alcoholism, and drug addictions, who are unwilling to take advantage of the services offered. We also have the problem of people coming from New York and other cities with homelessness issues who take over the sidewalk grates and halls in Penn Station.
The difference is that we are working together with all kinds of organizations, public and private, profit and non-profit, to address this in a holistic manner. It’s the only way to cope with a situation like this. You have to go all-in.
Paula Leotta: "I am not a racist." Sure, Jan. Nothing in the report here mentioned the ethnic diversity of the unhoused population. The mere assumption that the "poor" that would be served aren't all lily white like you is inherently racist.
Imagine her surpirise if I, a white male, related my homeless experiences to her. No drugs or littering involved and I managed to stay clean. While I was searching for work, people found it hard to believe I was homeless just by looking at me
Yes, the same thing happened to me back in the late 80s/early 90s. I was a middle-aged white, college-educated, non-drug using woman who happened to be unhoused. Occasionally I'd sleep sitting up on a park bench, occasionally elsewhere. Nobody I talked to believed me when I mentioned I was homeless, even when things went even more sideways and I sheltered in an abandoned building. I just somehow didn't fit people's stereotype. And, mind, that wasn't the first time. I graduated college in the mid-70s, in the middle of the Ford Recession (which most people don't even know was a thing.) I wasn't the only recent college graduate sleeping on the floor of an abandoned, falling-apart house in the small college town I couldn't afford to leave or live in. None of us "looked" unhoused, but we essentially were.
Realistically, being homeless is expensive. I held down a job while homeless many years ago; yes, it was a fast food job, but it was gainful employment. It just wasn't enough pay for me to be able to actually get shelter for myself; I won't go into detail, but I doubt seriously I'm the only person that's ever happened to.
Definitely. During both of the periods of homelessness I noted above, I had gainful employment. As with you, I simply did not make enough from those various jobs (none of them were fast food) to keep a reasonable roof over my head, food in my stomach, pay for heating and electricity, and for transportation (no car.) The other unhoused or marginally housed people I knew were in the same situation. I clearly remember walking the streets of several cities, stopping at every place that looked like a business, asking for work. A lot of the responses were "no" because I was older and college-educated. Some told me explicitly that I was "overqualified" and the employers didn't want me influencing their younger, more poorly-paid employees. They'd rather I was on the streets... and then bitched and moaned to Silly Hall about the homeless population. (Still do.)
You would need paramedics on standby to treat her for shock.
Hee hee!
Should I keep a bottle of smelling salts and a pair of clutching pearls on me? :D
Don't forget the casting couch to fall onto!
Thought about including a fainting couch but that might be a bit too much to lug around with me. :)
A couple of pillows to throw to the ground would do in a pinch.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8086f51b19afb27d09da5c84c1f12d6b3b9b1cb65938d8ee9c212e0303aeff1e.gif
Most people have no appreciation for how close they themselves are to homelessness. The majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. It only takes 60-90 days with no money coming in to cause massive upheavals in a family’s life. I’ve walked that line due to health issues that deprived me of my livelihood. It can happen to anyone, yet, we treat the homeless like pariahs. This is what a broken society looks like.
Indeed. It's another version of "I never thought the leopards would eat MY face!"
😂😂😂
NOGODZ20, I chat online with someone who is homeless. Incredibly Intelligent! There really is a horrible stereotype associated with it because people witness some very psychologically damaged people on public transportation etc. They need psychological care, not just a temp home & job training. Others are simply in a bad circumstance. Medical costs can render someone bankrupt and homeless in the US of A! That’s the real disgrace.
DM once saw a homeless man without shoes in winter. She gave him money and a little while later, she mentally slapped herself "Why didn't ask him to go and buy shoes ?"
She helped countless homeless people throughout the decades she lived, as long they were not aggressive.
Agreed. FWIW, I joined FA back when I was still homeless. It was a lifeline. Still is.
Me too. I was in a shelter & did my nails, my hair, & put on makeup every single day, so I didn't "look" homeless at all, ever. This was in Brooklyn & I was ill. I became disabled around 2000. It was a wild & crazy time before I got worse. Now my makeup just sits in the case waiting for me. Not into drugs or anything like that either. I wasn't interested in that. Just really wanted to figure out how to manage my life & get a place to live. The rest is a much longer story that I may make a post about at some point.
This is what I would like to see churches do. We can coexist with religious organizations like this one. Those mega boom boom evangelical churches are the one ruining our nation.
Jesus told those homeless bums to get a job.
Sha-na-na-na, sha-na-na-na-na
Ahh, yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip-yip
Mum-mum-mum-mum-mum-mum, get a job
Get a haircut and get a real job
Clean your act up and don't be a slob
Get it together like your big brother Bob
Why don't you, get a haircut and get a real job?
I won't give you no money, I always pay
Na-na, why don't you get a job
Say no way, say no way-ah, no way-ay-ay-ay
Na-na, why don't you get a job?
Don't keep saying that it's alright, it's alright,
It seems you went just a little too far this time
Heard a Bang Bang Bang, and down you go,
It's just a job I do.
AS IF 7 bucks an hour is enough to afford rent.
And quit complaining!
OT: since yesterday was honored as "May the Fourth be with you", my buddies and I have decided that today should be "May a Fifth be with you."
You can't drink all day.... .
if you don't start early.
https://ibb.co/dsdXF1KH
OT: Trump cuts NIH Safe to Sleep Team.
The party that loves fetal tissue sure does hate kids once they are born.
https://www.npr.org/2025/05/05/nx-s1-5383871/trump-cuts-safe-sleep-sids-baby
“Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're fucked.”
― George Carlin
Wow! I don't even know what to say to that. They really don't care about life at all, huh? Just birth. These things are so mind bogglingly bizarre.
Teach the homeless to play pickleball. /s
I may not be fully awake.
Was going to post "Take the Skinheads Bowling" by Camper Van Beethoven but decided not to.
https://youtu.be/xX1Uzw4Bbdo?t=107
Full movie with English captions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1jFmfXjP8Y
This is just one more symptom of localities having to make difficult decisions with limited resources because the federal government — with its HUGE resources — is refusing to spend them on actual human beings with actual human needs. Why should there even BE homeless people in the richest society in the history of history?
It isn't because we cannot help the poor, it is because we cannot satisfy the rich.