Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

open up churches for homeless people?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,794 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    Ted111 wrote: »
    A shop owner has no control over who sleeps in his doorway or on the pavement outside his premises and is not liable to any injury to them. ...

    interesting that, are you saying a shop doorway is not covered by the shop's public liability insurance? so if I tripped up on a step in the shop doorway or cut myself on a shop's door handle or glass in the door ... who's liable?


  • Options
    #33
    Ted111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Ted111


    Speedwell wrote: »
    It occurs to me that the Church's reason for being is to serve others, and that a church that failed in this respect would, as you say, be unfit to hold ceremonies in.

    It's primarily ritualistic and ceremonial rather than Christian or spiritual. They see their ceremonies as more important. That's their internal logic. Don't drag me into it. I just seek to accurately understand the world around me. It can't all be as perfect as me.


  • Options
    #34
    bodhrandude
    Registered Users Posts: 12,537 ✭✭✭✭bodhrandude


    Well seeing that Sligo County Council closed down the only library in the town centre, surely they could use that for housing the homeless anyway.

    If you want to get into it, you got to get out of it. (Hawkwind 1982)



  • Options
    #35
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,794 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    A bit off topic but is this true? I would have thought if you're renting you can let anyone at all stay with you as long as the rent is being paid. Does the right to quiet enjoyment cover the guests in the house?

    well you imagine me either 'letting' out a room or giving it out free.... its not my house, i wouldnt have the say so ... if I did own the house its a different matter innit. Plus and damages or whatever caused by third party I would have to put it right - and who knows I could go out one day and leave them there and they could change locks and claim 'squatters rights'


  • Options
    #36
    Ted111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Ted111


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    interesting that, are you saying a shop doorway is not covered by the shop's public liability insurance? so if I tripped up on a step in the shop doorway or cut myself on a shop's door handle or glass in the door ... who's liable?

    If you trip on the step of a shop or anywhere for that matter you won't be suing anybody. If you cut yourself on a door handle I'll be impressed but again you won't be suing anybody. How would you cut yourself on a glass paine in the door ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Estrellita
    Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭Estrellita


    LexieOnRale wrote: »
    A bit off topic but is this true? I would have thought if you're renting you can let anyone at all stay with you as long as the rent is being paid. Does the right to quiet enjoyment cover the guests in the house?

    Why don't you open up your place to the homeless instead of ignoring what Andy said? he can't due to his tenency agreement.

    When your place gets smashed up and you can't get your deposit back or a reference for another place, perhaps you will get the general idea as to why this is a bad idea.


    The guy starts a thread with an idea on how to tackle homelessness, and with the odd sensible answer regarding the insurance problems with the plan - he's had several wanna be smart @rses suggest his own place then ignore his responses. Then others want to push their anti-religon venom.

    I guess once it doesn't effect you then it isn't a problem.


  • Options
    #38
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    Estrellita wrote: »
    Then others want to push their anti-religon venom.

    The correct anti-venom is to not deserve the criticism in the first place.


  • Options
    #39
    Estrellita
    Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭Estrellita


    Speedwell wrote: »
    The correct anti-venom is to not deserve the criticism in the first place.

    If you can tell me how a religious debate is going to help the homelessness issue, I'm all ears.


  • Options
    #40
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    Estrellita wrote: »
    If you can tell me how a religious debate is going to help the homelessness issue, I'm all ears.

    (points to the thread topic) It's about churches. If you want to try to throw flack in an effort to deflect the issue from the Church's shortcomings in taking care of the poor, that's on your head.


  • Options
    #41
    Senna
    Registered Users Posts: 8,800 ✭✭✭Senna


    Of all the buildings in any town or city, a church is probably the worst building to house people over night, they aren't exactly warm at the best of times.

    Homeless people who sleep rough for an extended time have more issues than just not being able to find a roof to sleep under.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Estrellita
    Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭Estrellita


    Speedwell wrote: »
    (points to the thread topic) It's about churches. If you want to try to throw flack in an effort to deflect the issue from the Church's shortcomings in taking care of the poor, that's on your head.

    For fcuk sake. Wait till I see if my little nephew has time to answer you, the stupidity of that post requires a simpler mind.

    I'm out.


  • Options
    #43
    qo2cj1dsne8y4k
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,646 ✭✭✭✭qo2cj1dsne8y4k


    Estrellita wrote: »
    Why don't you open up your place to the homeless instead of ignoring what Andy said? he can't due to his tenency agreement.

    When your place gets smashed up and you can't get your deposit back or a reference for another place, perhaps you will get the general idea as to why this is a bad idea.


    The guy starts a thread with an idea on how to tackle homelessness, and with the odd sensible answer regarding the insurance problems with the plan - he's had several wanna be smart @rses suggest his own place then ignore his responses. Then others want to push their anti-religon venom.

    I guess once it doesn't effect you then it isn't a problem.


    So why is one persons property okay to vandalise? I wouldn't let anyone into my home. But if you're calling for others to tackle the problem at their expense, why not yourself?


  • Options
    #44
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Speedwell wrote: »
    Why's that?

    Because your post sounded hysterical.


  • Options
    #45
    Ted111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Ted111


    Speedwell wrote: »
    (points to the thread topic) It's about churches. If you want to try to throw flack in an effort to deflect the issue from the Church's shortcomings in taking care of the poor, that's on your head.

    I think you have a point about the hypocrisy of it. But I suspect, and I do not know this for sure, there may be some good, humanitarian people with any of the organized churches. They may be do a lot of work quietly and without looking for plaudits. But you wouldn't expect as institutions that they would open all there churches as homeless hostels. And as I've said there is a legal aspect to it. The minute they do that they have a duty of care to the people coming in. They must make all reasonable efforts to make the buildings safe. To prevent one vagrant from hurting another -security. Provide water. Toilets. Children coming in, are they getting bedding, privacy, food or water.

    I want my taxes to pay for the care of homeless and marginalised people. Shouldn't be passing the buck to anyone else. The RCC should be involved in less aspects of irish life eg schools and not more.


  • Options
    #46
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    The_Valeyard wrote: »
    Because your post sounded hysterical.

    Hmm, I reread it and I honestly don't see what you're on about.


  • Options
    #47
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,819 ✭✭✭stimpson


    Estrellita wrote: »
    If you can tell me how a religious debate is going to help the homelessness issue, I'm all ears.

    How about the pope sells off the churches riches and gives the money to the poor?


  • Options
    #48
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Speedwell wrote: »
    Hmm, I reread it and I honestly don't see what you're on about.

    That's your opinion. Enjoy your evening.


  • Options
    #49
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    Ted111 wrote: »
    I think you have a point about the hypocrisy of it. But I suspect, and I do not know this for sure, there may be some good, humanitarian people with any of the organized churches. They may be do a lot of work quietly and without looking for plaudits. But you wouldn't expect as institutions that they would open all there churches as homeless hostels. And as I've said there is a legal aspect to it. The minute they do that they have a duty of care to the people coming in. They must make all reasonable efforts to make the buildings safe. To prevent one vagrant from hurting another -security. Provide water. Toilets. Children coming in, are they getting bedding, privacy, food or water.

    I want my taxes to pay for the care of homeless and marginalised people. Shouldn't be passing the buck to anyone else. The RCC should be involved in less aspects of irish life eg schools and not more.

    That's a good point about whether the church should be involved in something that we have a government to take care of. I would also prefer the church not make themselves indispensable by taking on tasks that the secular public would have to spend their tax money reimbursing them for.


  • Options
    #50
    FizzleSticks
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,172 ✭✭✭FizzleSticks


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #51
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    The_Valeyard wrote: »
    That's your opinion. Enjoy your evening.

    Just fyi, disagreeing with you while in possession of a vagina does not constitute "hysteria". It's a matter I've thought about for a long time and come to some conclusions that matter to me, and you're tossing off a few comments to relieve boredom, I take it. Feel free to treat the subject with the same seriousness as I have.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Insurance kinda makes it impossible.

    The Church was instrumental in setting up the Simon charity, which is perhaps the one most synonymous with tackling homelessness. And they did it as part of their social justice ethos. I think they have been pretty proactive, it's not like they have ignored the problem, but there are limits to what they can do, more so now as the number of priests is rapidly declining.


  • Options
    #53
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    They turned me away from an Inn. What chance the average wino?


  • Options
    #54
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Speedwell wrote: »
    Just fyi, disagreeing with you while in possession of a vagina does not constitute "hysteria". It's a matter I've thought about for a long time and come to some conclusions that matter to me, and you're tossing off a few comments to relieve boredom, I take it. Feel free to treat the subject with the same seriousness as I have.

    While I'm possession of a vagina?? WTF are you even on about? Rambling post.


  • Options
    #55
    Speedwell
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭Speedwell


    The_Valeyard wrote: »
    While I'm possession of a vagina?? WTF are you even on about? Rambling post.

    Is that what you think I meant? Really?


  • Options
    #56
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    Speedwell wrote: »
    disagreeing with you while in possession of a vagina.... and you're tossing off.

    Some vivid imaginations in here


  • Options
    #57
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Speedwell wrote: »
    Is that what you think I meant? Really?

    I honestly have no idea what that post meant.


  • Options
    #58
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Jesus. wrote: »
    They turned me away from an Inn. What chance the average wino?

    You stop putting places out of business with your free food n booze


  • Options
    #59
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,794 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    Ted111 wrote: »
    I think you have a point about the hypocrisy of it. But I suspect, and I do not know this for sure, there may be some good, humanitarian people with any of the organized churches. They may be do a lot of work quietly and without looking for plaudits. But you wouldn't expect as institutions that they would open all there churches as homeless hostels. And as I've said there is a legal aspect to it. The minute they do that they have a duty of care to the people coming in. They must make all reasonable efforts to make the buildings safe. To prevent one vagrant from hurting another -security. Provide water. Toilets. Children coming in, are they getting bedding, privacy, food or water.

    I want my taxes to pay for the care of homeless and marginalised people. Shouldn't be passing the buck to anyone else. The RCC should be involved in less aspects of irish life eg schools and not more.

    shop doorways offer no toilets (well officially) and no water/food either


  • Options
    #60
    Andy From Sligo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,794 ✭✭✭✭Andy From Sligo


    Senna wrote: »
    Of all the buildings in any town or city, a church is probably the worst building to house people over night, they aren't exactly warm at the best of times....

    They more warmer and dryer than a shop doorway or park bench.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Ted111
    Closed Accounts Posts: 990 ✭✭✭Ted111


    Andy From Sligo wrote: »
    shop doorways offer no toilets (well officially) and no water/food either

    I'm not sure if you're on the wind up Andy. But I'll indulge for the moment.
    Outside the door is outside the property. It would be the public pavement. If you for example chose to sleep there it would be your responsibility. If anything bad happened to you it would be your responsibility. Just like if you trip on a step it is your responsibility for being clumsy. You can't sue anyone.

    Now if the shop keeper opens his shop door to the public then he has a duty of care to them. If they do something inside that is as a result of their own negligence he is not responsible. For example if they cut their hand on a door handle. However if an accident happens that is down to his/her negligence say if a staff member pours engine oil on the stairs and then Andy slips and breaks his arm then Andy can sue the hole off the shop.

    By the same token a church is responsible for what happens in their buildings and not outside. And within they must take reasonable precautions to look after people coming in. Mass goers don't take much looking after. But if they housed as de facto residents people in the church then they require more looking after.


Advertisement