• JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    What happens when those people leave the housing provided and leave because they want their freedom to move around and be on the street again?

    • olivebranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      That is perfectly fine. You don’t need to force people to live in a house if they don’t want to. But kinda hard not to want to be in a warm house during freezing Finland winters.

  • shimdidly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Isaiah 3

    14 The Lord will enter into judgment with the ancients of his people, and the princes thereof: for ye have eaten up the vineyard; the spoil of the poor is in your houses.

    15 What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord God of hosts.

    • eggmasterflex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also Deuteronomy 15:

      7 If there is among you anyone in need, a member of your community in any of your towns within the land that the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hard-hearted or tight-fisted toward your needy neighbor.

      8 You should rather open your hand, willingly lending enough to meet the need, whatever it may be.

      9 Be careful that you do not entertain a mean thought, thinking, “The seventh year, the year of remission, is near,” and therefore view your needy neighbor with hostility and give nothing; your neighbor might cry to the Lord against you, and you would incur guilt.

      10 Give liberally and be ungrudging when you do so, for on this account the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake.

      11 Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, “Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.”

      • Chr0nos1@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        If you’re going to follow the Bible, make sure you’re not picking and choosing the parts you want to follow. If the commands from your god are that important, you can’t ignore half of them.

        2 Kings 6:28-29 But then the king asked, “What is the matter?” She replied, “This woman said to me: ‘Come on, let’s eat your son today, then we will eat my son tomorrow.’ So we cooked my son and ate him. Then the next day I said to her, ‘Kill your son so we can eat him,’ but she has hidden her son.

        Psalm 137:9 Blessed the one who seizes your children and smashes them against the rock: the children represent the future generations, and so must be destroyed if the enemy is truly to be eradicated

        Leviticus 25:44-46 “Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.”

        1 Timothy 2:11-12
        “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.”

  • Auli@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    But they didn’t solve it. They are doing something but there are still homeless people. Looks like their plan of action is definitely better though.

    • olivebranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t know the exact way they are enforcing this, but if there are still homeless people then either there are some preconditions to apply or people want to be homeless or government can’t afford to house everyone.

      In the first case, preconditions shouldn’t exist, everyone deserves to not freeze to death. In the second case, there is no real problem, if someone doesn’t want to live in a house, than they should be allowed to not live in a house. And in third case, you can’t have millioners and billioners and tell the country you just don’t have money to house the homeless, tax them and build homes.

  • PatFusty@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    A lot of homeless people choose to be homeless. I remember I was talking to a homeless in downtown Los Angeles and he told me he used to be a housing contractor and was a millionaire. He said he preferred the street because he likes the drugs and likes to harass women with impunity. I was also told by other homeless that they don’t like the housing projects and prefer being outside.

    Edit: you can downvote me all you want but this is my experience. Sure there are many that want to be in homes but they also want no strings attached honestly for free like if they are babies.

    • olivebranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      That sounds like an excuse for him. He is a drug addict, he doesn’t really have a choice. First you get people of the streets, then you give them treatment for drugs. People in high stress situations are far more likely to get and stay addicted.

  • Crampon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Different take on the bench. The dividers allows for the pregnant and the disabled to sit. Which I believe is more important than letting some homeless sleep on that particular bench.

  • Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    Somehow, treating vulnerable people with dignity by helping them out without strings attached helps our society overall. Who would’ve thought.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      But conservatism requires a lesser people to scapegoat and oppress. Could we perhaps criminalize homelessness, and instead of housing we imprison them, so I feel satisfied that they’re being punished for their god given misfortune?

      • olivebranch@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        It is ironic that you are scapegoating republicans for this political failure of liberals, who also support the policies that are the cause of these issues.

        Liberals also support prioritization of private property laws over personal living standards.

        Only socialists support prioritizing human well-being and socialism is a bad word in the US.