Or "City officials upset that local Christian community actually acts Christian."

They’re just upset he’s worshipping the wrong Jesus

Exactly this is the same bullshit as arresting people for feeding starving homeless

It’s fucking sick

You're thinking of politicians. Bureaucracy is the scapegoat they use to cover their machinations. A functional society needs bureaucrats to do all the tasks that makes society work, without them everything would fall apart.

Most self-professed American "Christians" I have ever met do not follow or believe in the teachings of Christ.

They say the world looks down on the bureaucrats

They say we're anal, compulsive, and weird

But when push comes to shove

You gotta do what you love

Even if it's not a good idea!

I always thought churches were known as sanctuaries. It's not like he's permanently housing people, he's literally providing sanctuary from the deadly weather

We can’t do that cause that’s sOcIaLiSm (sarcasm)

You don't know about them because the media either refuses to cover them or misrepresents them.

For example, consider the shitshow going on around Cop City in Atlanta: the police have already murdered one protestor in cold blood, the mayor is thwarting a public referendum, etc.

Entitled dumb as shit boomers are what happened. You know the ones; they love mob stories and cops and robbers and cowboys and indians and oh are they SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO SMART!

Because nobody riots for vague goals like that?

It's always reactionary to some event.

Though I see your point, I'd rather have less Jesus in our government, not more.

I think the logic is that the latter is saying that being homeless is part of who they are as a person, whereas the former sees them as regular people who are currently experiencing homelessness. It's like how people are shifting away from saying "drug addict," and saying things like "person addicted to drugs" or saying "undocumented" instead of "illegal" as it's less dehumanizing.

It's a small, subtle difference, but I get it.

It isn't, unhoused is the best I've heard personally.

Both makes it clear that the problem is housing and acknowledges that the "homeless" often do have homes of a sort.

The phrase is trying to emphasize that being unhoused is a temporary condition that can be remedied but it's just too unwieldy in conversation to do anything but annoy people.

Away

No, Mr. Loom. I expect them to die.

they are supposed to scare the middle class into not risking their livelihoods.

Around here, apparently, miles outside of town. All the bridges have 'no trespassing' signs by them (in English and Spanish, and this is Indiana). I live outside of town and I regularly see people walking down the highway to get to their crappy minimum wage jobs. It probably takes them over an hour to walk, and it was -15 here last week.

So apparently where they're supposed to go is a tent out in the woods.

Oddly enough, there's an established homeless shelter right next door to this church. Based on their sign and name, they're also faith based. Were they full? Did they turn some people away for reasons of their own?

I'm just very curious to hear more.

They claim they saw more calls. I'm gonna call bullshit.

police department saw a spike in calls for service in May 2023

The city became aware that Dad's Place was housing people in November

Even giving them the benefit of the doubt, by their own admission it took their ace detectives 6 months of responding to calls before realizing what was happening there?

And: were those calls placed b the same people who then just happy to have a say in zoning violations.