My post on the Anti-fascist Facebook Group:
The Fascists are trying to stop the Churches from feeding the poor. Take a stand for righteousness. Visit the site and leave a supportive comment as soon as you can. Don't let any religious differences stand in the way on this, please.
I'm not a Methodist, but I stand with their feeding the poor. I stand against the Fascists, who don't give a damn about the poor or about you.
The decision has been made that we are operating as a charity dining hall, and therefore are breaking zoning ordinance. So, to feed the hungry and poor on church property, according to this ruling, is not an allowed function of the church.
A Facebook user asked: "How is that fascism?
Just apply for the correct permits. . ."
My reply here because I had planned to blog on this anyway:
Applying for the correct permits is not what this is about. It's a zoning issue. I don't want to split hairs though. I understand what you mean.
Regardless, they could apply for a zoning waiver or permit or rezoning, etc., but that implies that the state can reject the church feeding whomever it wants on its own property. There would likely be a zoning hearing open to the locals whining against the poor being in their neighborhood.
This issue doesn't stop there though. There are many fascist municipal councilors across the country who have moved to prevent churches and others feeding the hungry on public property such as in public parks. So, if you can't feed them on public property and you can't feed them at your own church.... Are you seeing the pattern – the direction – the point behind the move to keep them from being fed?
Do you put the "rights" of the better-off above caring for the poor? I'm not saying that you do. I don't know. I'm just addressing that aspect of the issue.
Creating, abusing, and neglecting the poor is a long-running plan being unfolded more and more. Feeding the poor in public parks is not evil. It is a good thing. The problems arise when further care is blocked, which it is.
We have freedom of religion in the U.S. We don't have a state church. We have the free-exercise clause. Christianity demands, per Jesus Christ, that its adherents feed the poor even at risk to itself from the evils of the secular state, which evils are self-evident here.
Now, who is and who is not a member of the body of Christ? Seekers are invited into the churches. Can the state tell the church it can't feed such seekers? Who's defining the churches' terms? Who can say that a seeker can't return over weeks, months, years?
You specifically asked how it's fascism, per se. If you draw the line further along than do I, then you don't have to apply that term to the thrust of those seeking to enforce a zoning ordinance that is anti-Christian/against a Christian church.
Churches are zoned for residential and commercial areas in the U.S. to prevent anti-freedom of religion. There are limits placed upon the churches.
The debate here is one of further encouragement designed as part of an incremental plan to destroy the Christian religion and others. Freedom of Christian-religious conscience is to be destroyed. It is a New Age Movement aspect. Not all New Agers subscribe, but most do not know the underlying secret plans that are being "externalized." The conscience of hedonistic plutocrats is to be programmed into all humanity. It is an evil conscience. It lacks an unselfish root. It is designed to lock in a caste system – their wicked hierarchy that forces others to serve them as debt slaves and worse.
I don't coerce the New Agers, and I say that they are wrong to be attempting to coerce me.
The plutocrats hate my brand of righteousness. Look at Dick Cheney calling it "recklessness cloaked in righteousness."
Also, permits cost money that could be put to the highest and best use instead.