Lord Mouse arrests Food Not Bombs activists

#27
#27
IPorange said:
That's true, but public space seems appropriate, unless the local gov wants to designate somewhere else.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

hopefully you'd have a seperate area designated for this purpose. parks and other similar places have been disasters for the locals here in california.
 
#29
#29
droski said:
hopefully you'd have a seperate area designated for this purpose. parks and other similar places have been disasters for the locals here in california.
Click to expand...

so I've heard. Like I said, I don't have a solution.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#30
#30
We've got a pretty damned high level of homeless population here... Seems like there are charity-run shelters and soup lines all around. I've gone out and talked to homeless camps a few times, they seem to come from all over the west. The city actively enforces these kind of designated panhandling zones to keep businesses relatively happy, and in areas of downtown that are relatively remote from residences, particularly high end ones. There are guys asking for change on most high traffic corners, but I'd say the bums here are the least aggressive (if that's a good way to put it) of any major city I've ever been to.
 
#31
#31
I met a guy in a Univeristy class who had chosen to be homeless and was now trying to rejoin society. I was less than impressed with him.
 
#32
#32
milohimself said:
We've got a pretty damned high level of homeless population here... Seems like there are charity-run shelters and soup lines all around. I've gone out and talked to homeless camps a few times, they seem to come from all over the west. The city actively enforces these kind of designated panhandling zones to keep businesses relatively happy, and in areas of downtown that are relatively remote from residences, particularly high end ones. There are guys asking for change on most high traffic corners, but I'd say the bums here are the least aggressive (if that's a good way to put it) of any major city I've ever been to.
Click to expand...

Seattle had a panhandling zone as well:

fullcity600.jpg
 
#33
#33
What, the whole thing?

The panhandling zones here were mainly set up because of a few dozen gutter punks who have been around the area that decided to try and set up shop in front of businesses in more active commercial parts of town because they could.
 
#35
#35
milohimself said:
What, the whole thing?

The panhandling zones here were mainly set up because of a few dozen gutter punks who have been around the area that decided to try and set up shop in front of businesses in more active commercial parts of town because they could.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to Jay and Silent Bob?
 
#36
#36
IPorange said:
Preserve all fertilized embryos due to the sanctity of "human life." let the actually human mentally ill or behaviorly challenged starve because they suck at life.

I'm confused.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

My stance is simply, being homeless doesn't entitle you to my property. I choose to help people because I want to, but they don't have a right to my food and shelter.
 
#37
#37
Rasputin_Vol said:
There is no evidence that feeding homeless people will bring in more homeless people. Their fears are misguided.

You should take the lead to prove them wrong, LG, by inviting several of the local O-Town homelessness victims to your law practice or home and feed them. Just think of all of the positive and inspirational work you would be doing to ease tensions between the haves and have-nots in your area.
Click to expand...

Just economic sense tells you it's inevitable. If you subsidize any activity you are going to see more of that activity.
 
#38
#38
utgibbs said:
This food is being given away freely.

BUT, what happened to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness? You are expounding a world view which hasn't been seen since Caligula. People only have rights IF they have property. The notion of inalienable rights - in other words - the gift of the Enlightenment - you have tossed out the window.

I thought we might find some true retrogrades in this post. Thanks for playing.

The bourgeois mind = barbarism.
Click to expand...

The founders saw "property" and "pursuit of happiness" as one and the same.

Property is the physical manifestation of how you have exercised your life and liberty. It's literally proof of life.
 
Last edited:
#40
#40
Well yeah, I don't know if you were being completely facetious or if Seattle actually did take such a measure.
 
#43
#43
lumberjack4 said:
My stance is simply, being homeless doesn't entitle you to my property. I choose to help people because I want to, but they don't have a right to my food and shelter.
Click to expand...

I agree with your view. I think most do.

I think what IP is commenting on is the belief that those that want to outlaw abortion and prevent the destruction of fertilized embryos don't have a moral leg to stand on if they fight against efforts to help mentally ill homeless people particularly if the govt is paying the bills.

But I could be mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#44
#44
JayVols said:
I agree with your view. I think most do.

I think what IP is commenting on is the belief that those that want to outlaw abortion and prevent the destruction of fertilized embryos don't have a moral leg to stand on if they fight against efforts to help mentally ill homeless people particularly if the govt is paying the bills.

But I could be mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Kinda like the rabid pro-choicers that are rabid anti-capital punishment folks?
 
#45
#45
volinbham said:
Kinda like the rabid pro-choicers that are rabid anti-capital punishment folks?
Click to expand...

Exactly like that. It makes absolutely no sense to me, either group. Neither have a moral leg to stand on, imo.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#46
#46
JayVols said:
I agree with your view. I think most do.

I think what IP is commenting on is the belief that those that want to outlaw abortion and prevent the destruction of fertilized embryos don't have a moral leg to stand on if they fight against efforts to help mentally ill homeless people particularly if the govt is paying the bills.

But I could be mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

this is why I can't get behind the pro-life agenda. Social and religious conservatives want all abortion outlawed while at the same time want social welfare programs reduced to a bare minimum "safety net". You can't force a 16 year old meth addict to have a baby and expect her to be a good mother.
 
#47
#47
MG1968 said:
this is why I can't get behind the pro-life agenda. Social and religious conservatives want all abortion outlawed while at the same time want social welfare programs reduced to a bare minimum "safety net". You can't force a 16 year old meth addict to have a baby and expect her to be a good mother.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. It's an undefendable position.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#48
#48
volinbham said:
Kinda like the rabid pro-choicers that are rabid anti-capital punishment folks?
Click to expand...

completely agree. I had some crazy set up shop in the middle of my university who shoved posters depicting mutilated fetuses into innocent student faces.

Not sure the pro-choice argument rubs people that way - but i've never been accosted by one.
 
#49
#49
MG1968 said:
this is why I can't get behind the pro-life agenda. Social and religious conservatives want all abortion outlawed while at the same time want social welfare programs reduced to a bare minimum "safety net". You can't force a 16 year old meth addict to have a baby and expect her to be a good mother.
Click to expand...

Supporting an issue doesn't require a hell of a lot of thought. People are like that on both sides - personally I don't think the pro-choice people think hard enough about where life begins. Jmo, though.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top