Traffic On Ocean Avenue!

Take into consideration that the circus is in town and perhaps that's why parking has been difficult. Perhaps next weekend the double-parking will ease up, since this is the last week for the circus.

MeredithB wrote:
If a person is going to pick and choose what day he/she should be allowed to double-park, why shouldn't that same courtesy be extended to everyone, irregardless if they are religious or not!

In point of fact the block that I was discussing where there were three churches did extend the curtesy to everyone. If a resident came home on Sunday and there were no spaces (due to spaces being taken up by people on the block to visit churches) the residents could double park as well and leave a sign in their car with their house number or alert one of the deacons at the closest church. If someone needed to get out they could ring the person's bell, or the deacon would go to the home to get the person to move their car. Again this was all worked out amongst the folks that lived and worshiped there because no one begrudged anyone else's rights.

Double parking has been a part of Brooklyn life since parking regulations were invented. Why start complaining about it now?

Carnivore wrote: [quote=queencallipygos]I never said I thought it was acceptable. I also haven't seen any attempt of people attending a scientific convention TO double-park in a place where doing so would be necessary. If you want to have a science convention in a church on Ocean Avenue, and the only way you can fit everyone in there is double-parking, hell, I see no problem with letting you do that either. (The fact that most conventions are held near parking garages, in my experience, just eliminates the need to do so, but if you had to double-park, why not?)

You haven't seen them attempt it because they (and you) know damned well they'd be towed. I attend a monthly scientific meeting in the Department of Health building that fills an auditorium that's the size of a typical church congregation, and is not near any parking garage. I don't have a car, but if I actually drove to the meeting and tried to double park with a note on the dashboard telling people to come inside and let us know if you need me to move, the car would be towed faster than an Appalachian Pentecostal gets bitten by a snake.
I'd imagine that someone double-parking on Eastern Parkway while attempting to contemplate our place in the world at the Botanical Gardens would also be towed. There is a double standard that discriminates against non-religious belief systems. Not that I expect it to change. For all that we'd like to believe that this is a bastion of liberalism and rational thought (or that many in other parts of the country would like to paint us as godless heathens), Brooklyn is a hotbed of religious activity. There are probably more churches in Brooklyn than in many entire red States. I recognize that, and recognize that the preferential treatment isn't going to change.

But don't pretend that it's fair or in keeping with the spirit of our constitution.

I honestly wasn't intending to get into a debate about this particular topic. In truth, if I'm in fact INCORRECT about the current laws concerning double parking -- WHICH IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE -- I will cheerfully be corrected.

What I was more trying to do was express skepticism that double-parking being allowed to slide in this case was a sign of Flagrant Dominionism. I do understand that there is a double standard in this country in general -- but I do NOT think that that double standard is what is contributing to the traffic problem on Ocean Avenue. Nor do I think that that is what is contributing to the ire of the original poster - if you look at homeowner's post above, it looks like everyone else in the block has no problem calling each other and saying "hey, move your car," and the person with the offending car -- no matter where they were or what reason they had double-parked -- will move it. The thing is, you have to ASK them first, otherwise they don't KNOW that they've blocked you in.

So it looks to me that people are flying into a big snit when all they REALLY have to do is call the owner's number and ask them to move their damn car. And I'm sorry, but if someone is amenable to WORKING WITH YOU, then that's just not an example of your rights being violated. Moreover, if the people who own the car are more than happy to have you call them and ask them to move, but you're instead decrying your status as a member of the underprivileged, then Ihave to wonder just what it is you're trying to achieve -- equality, or what?

queencallipygos wrote: I honestly wasn't intending to get into a debate about this particular topic. In truth, if I'm in fact INCORRECT about the current laws concerning double parking -- WHICH IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE -- I will cheerfully be corrected.

There is no exception in the law for Sunday churchgoers, because that would obviously be unconstitutional. So the same thing is accomplished by selective enforcement.

queencallipygos wrote: What I was more trying to do was express skepticism that double-parking being allowed to slide in this case was a sign of Flagrant Dominionism. I do understand that there is a double standard in this country in general -- but I do NOT think that that double standard is what is contributing to the traffic problem on Ocean Avenue. Nor do I think that that is what is contributing to the ire of the original poster - if you look at homeowner's post above, it looks like everyone else in the block has no problem calling each other and saying "hey, move your car," and the person with the offending car -- no matter where they were or what reason they had double-parked -- will move it. The thing is, you have to ASK them first, otherwise they don't KNOW that they've blocked you in.

So it looks to me that people are flying into a big snit when all they REALLY have to do is call the owner's number and ask them to move their damn car. And I'm sorry, but if someone is amenable to WORKING WITH YOU, then that's just not an example of your rights being violated. Moreover, if the people who own the car are more than happy to have you call them and ask them to move, but you're instead decrying your status as a member of the underprivileged, then Ihave to wonder just what it is you're trying to achieve -- equality, or what?

If that were the case, you should be able to do that whenever the street is crowded and you need to park. The reality is that enforcement of the law stops on Sunday to accommodate churchgoers.

queencallipygos wrote: Not every religion considers Sunday to be their Holy Day. If the law really wanted to be giving religious observers a pass, they'd be doing this on Saturdays as well. And Fridays, come to think of it.

Actually, if this is the case, it quite clearly shows that they are not treating all religions equally, thereby violating the first amendment by the criteria you proposed in your initial post on this topic.

And just to chime back in here, parking regulations are adjusted in Hassidic neighborhoods to accomodate those religious populations. The service road in the area outside the synagogs on EP are often closed to traffic so that there is no disruption to the worshipers going into and out of temple. Parking regulations are suspended on feast days and significant high holy days for all sorts of religions here in the city.

Lax parking/traffic enforcement isn't limited to the Christian community in NYC, however, I do think it is seen more because it occurs with regularity every Sunday. But, I've driven through Williamsburg during certain holidays, and traffic is at a standstill because of the sheer number of people congregating in the street in celebration. The Traffic Alternatives folks are still up in arms about the judges parking on the walkway at the courthouse downtown Brooklyn. Hospitals have parking spaces reserved for doctors. Taxis get taxi stand areas in Manhattan. Bikers don't get tickets for running red lights. Everyone gets a pass on something.

I don't get upset because I can't do something that other people do (double park), because there is probably some perk I've got that others don't. That's just life. Being upset about it is like being pissed off because women get free drinks in bars or because men don't have lines at public restrooms. Besides, I feel that if you are committed enough to your religion to get up at the ass-crack of dawn on a Sunday and spend a couple of hours listening to someone tell you about hellfire and eternal damnation the least the rest of us can do is give you a pass on the $115 ticket.

it's not church-goers this thread is making me sick of....

:roll:

queencallipygos wrote: But I would wager that it's not any kind of official policy that "oh let's waive double-parking on Sundays," more that this may be just the way things shook down because the NYPD may be short-staffed on that day themselves.

It doesn't have to be "official policy" for it to be wrong and unfair. I don't think there was an official policy that African Americans would be the focus of stop-and-frisk efforts by the NYPD. Is that ok then?

Carnivore wrote: [quote=queencallipygos]But I would wager that it's not any kind of official policy that "oh let's waive double-parking on Sundays," more that this may be just the way things shook down because the NYPD may be short-staffed on that day themselves.

It doesn't have to be "official policy" for it to be wrong and unfair. I don't think there was an official policy that African Americans would be the focus of stop-and-frisk efforts by the NYPD. Is that ok then?

...On the one hand, racial profiling is not okay, no. And that's why that's why we're encouraged to report that kind of thing to NYPD review boards.

On the other hand...Erm, I think there's somewhat of a sizeable difference between double-parking and unlawful search and seizure, so...this is kind of apples-to-oranges anyway.

MeredithB wrote: Um, well, my computer logs me out after a while and I didn't want to log back in at that moment but now that I know that you are a moderator I'll just keep my comments to myself.

Whatever for. People knowing it was you hasn't seemed to stop you thus far.

MeredithB wrote: [quote=queencallipygos]...On the one hand, racial profiling is not okay, no.

Yet, in a way, religious profiling is OK to you?

Of course not. But I never did say I thought that was okay either. I'm only saying that, as evil as I DO think religious profiling is, that I don't think this IS a case OF religious profiling.

But as you have made abundantly clear, you think it is, and you will not be dissuaded. so, fine.