As a nation we have forgotten that there is a separation of church and state. this is to protect freedom of religious choice. with that said, The neighbors or the city should not have any say at all on the practice of sanctuary which is guaranteed by the constitution of the united states of america. it not up for debate as some here think it should be!
I don't think this a separation issue. The using of the church (or a portion of it) as a shelter (changing the use) requires a permit from the city. Just as if the church change it's use to a restaurant. The city wants to ensure that use as a shelter meets the city's requirements (zoning, parking, etc.) before they do so.
On a side note, if a group proposes to build a church somewhere, they are still held to the same building and permitting requirements as any other individual or company.
As someone who has helped for a long time at free church community dinners for those less fortunate (on both sides of the river), here's the thing: Many people who have fallen on hard times often also suffer from mental health issues, alcoholism and drug addiction. I'm no professional and am not saying it's a majority, but these issues exist among the homeless and neighbors have the right to be concerned about public safety. It is especially important that any group offering shelter - obviously with the best of intentions in lending a helping held - also have the training and expertise to deal with the potential of above.
Humanity says we need to shelter those who have no shelter.
I understand most of the occupants will be men, statistically, but if the shelter is to provide protection from the elements, it needs to be available to anyone who needs protection. That bothers me far more than the location of the shelter.
Why does my gut tell me that if the facility was for Vietnam Veterans the community would be less resistant?
That may be a natural reaction, but its not logical.
Humans need to help humans with basic needs.
Your property value (as it were) is not as valuable to the community as protecting human life and dignity.
If you think it is, I think you need to take a good long look in the mirror.
Let's split the difference.
In Sonora, we will put all of the homeless on a bus and send them to Mi Wuk and then the miner can keep care of them.
Every body is happy then.
If you don't earn a living and pay don't any tax's, don't expect anything out of life.
I am not here to pay for any one else's way through their lives.
I live in Sonora and I do not want this town become a sanctuary for the homeless, that is what San Francisco is for.
Feed the homeless to the hungry.
Sanctuary has been offered in all the united states for years. this issue has been brought to the supreme court several times and was upheld. the building has a kitchen which was zoned at that time, the building was also approved for use by humans therefore this issue is about denying sanctuary to the homeless. Most of whom grew up here. the main issue is the bigots here who want the homeless to just go away.
The interesting part of this regards the one is the tolerance of the Red Church preacher and congregation regarding homeless people, and intolerance regarding gay people. They abandoned their own church leadership because they allowed gay ministers at other locations, a radical departure. At the same time, they have a history of helping the homeless, even allowing homeless people to sleep in the church. Why the paradox?
If it was left to Humanity, these people would be trampled under foot. The Bible tells us to care for those in need, however. It seems to me the perfect place for that to happen is in a church.
Mental illness is more prevalent in the homeless population as a whole, and probably rears its head when they are in their most desperate hour. We should let the churches do what they do best, and minister to the needs of these people. Hopefully the influence they receive at church will help to rehabilitate them.
The gay issue is something completely separate. Clearly, homosexuality goes against what is written in the Bible, therefore the church has attempted to distance itself from it. Caring for the homeless, on the other hand, is encouraged. Seems like they are being pretty consistant to me.
NOTE: You must be a registered site user and logged in to post comments (see links below).