Posted on 03/22/2009 1:38:09 PM PDT by libh8er
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsvcwQEFKAI
What did he feed them to?
Freedom can be a little disorderly a little messy. But don’t worry there won’t be much of that in your future. Gov will have everything under control. You’ll love it.
Let me briefly play devil's advocate for the nanny-state.
This isn't a clear-cut "freedom" issue. The ordinance at issue covers city property, and doesn't completely prohibit feeding the homeless. It only prohibits doing so without a permit.
A city should be able to put reasonable restrictions on the use of public property. I'm not so sure that requiring a permit before hosting a large gathering on public property is "unreasonable". Now the *conditions* required for granting a permit are another matter. Likewise, this would be a different situation if he was trying to feed people on private property, like in a church. But I don't think requiring a permit for large groups using city property is per se unreasonable or an unacceptable intrusion on a citizen's liberty.
That being said, I agree that this guy's appearance is completely irrelevant. Same with his (presumably) goofy political beliefs. If this guy had been sporting a crew cut and a pair of dockers, and did the *exact* same thing as part of a church group, I think most people here would be defending him.
The park in question was the site of the Tea Party this past weekend. Instead of 5,000 protesters, picture it full of homeless doing their laundry in the fountain, bathing and shaving in the rest rooms, sleeping in the bushes, and shooting up in the entry ways of the surrounding buildings. Throw in a random act of violence every once in a while. All congregating there because Tom and Suzie Do-gooder drive up in their SUV to feed the pigeons every noon. Except it’s not just Tom and Suzie doing this, so it becomes a marshaling point for the area homeless. The gem of your downtown revitalization program in a city funded by tourism turns into a hell hole. No wonder Tom and Suzie bring the food from their house to the park and not the park folk to their house for a sit-down feed, a shower and shave, and a nap in the den, all of which Tom and Suzie are certainly free to do. No, instead they set up an attractive nuisance elsewhere. Freedom is the former, not the latter.
Ok, let me get this straight: people have rights and freedoms as long as their motives and objectives meet your standards. Which obviously excludes liberals(NOBODY has ever accused me of being one).
Not too long ago we saw a picture of MO Shell feeding the homeless, and a guy with a cell phone taking her picture...and she was worshiped for doing it..
Not questioning his right to ‘do good’. Only his motives, and of liberals in general.
Thanks for your support. Good to see that some here are principled lovers of freedom. If freedom is just for our kind-those who look like us and think like us- then it is not freedom.
different kind of different as me
As a Christian I certainly do not support government telling people they cannot feed hungry people. I would break that ordnance myself. Matt 25:31-46 comes to mind.
As a conservative I do not support government interfering in the lives of free people feeding the hungry either.
Uhhhhh wait around for a year.....when we hit 25% they're going to look mighty tasty
I wonder how many illegal immigrants the police passed on the way to make the arrest
Feed the homeless to the hungry.
He should have been arrested for criminal ugliness!
LOL have the homeless over FOR Thanksgiving?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.