DN Editorial: Ban on food distribution on Parkway heats up

THIS TOWN HAS activism twisted into its DNA, so we shouldn't be too surprised about the latest protests over a new city policy that will ban mass public feedings of the homeless and hungry in the city's parks, especially on the Ben Franklin Parkway.

Almost every day of the week, a variety of organizations and individuals - including a few from Jersey - serve donated food out of the back of vans and trucks. The city, concerned over health and social-service issues, wants the food to be distributed indoors, and to provide safety training to those handing out food.

But activists are fighting the city on this; some claim that forcing hungry people inside would compromise their dignity, or that the city really wants the Parkway clear of destitute people.

This pushback is so outraged that we admit to being curious about the feeders' motives. For one thing, the feeders are presuming to speak on behalf of the hungry and homeless. Why can't the hungry speak for themselves?

These are charitable people who are doing good. But the way they're insisting that they should be allowed to do things their way, or that they won't change their plans, suggest to us that their motives are more complex than simply protecting the dignity of those getting the food. Are they afraid that being moved indoors means no one will notice their charitable acts? Or that moving their acts inside will be less convenient than simply pulling up to a curb and parking? Overall, it feels like what's operating here is a tyranny of goodness.

What else to call it, especially when activists insist that the city must honor the wishes of those they feed who don't want to go indoors?

A few activists, some of whom protested Thursday, say the city is lying about its motivation - that it just wants to get rid of these groups before the Barnes opens. First of all, we don't buy it: These very debates - with the city threatening to ban feedings and activists pushing back - have been going on for nearly a decade.

Besides, if the city is concerned about large groups of hungry people providing a sour note to the Parkway's museums and cultural institituions, we'd say: What's the problem with that?

No one would deny that being hungry or homeless are tragedies - individual and societal. What's wrong with not wanting to confront this in our most public places, especially on the Parkway, which has been designed to convey a sweeping scale of human achievement?

Yes, it would be horrifying to outlaw hungry, homeless or destitute individuals from our public spaces. But that's not what this is. There are just too many reasons this ban makes sense.

Suppose any group - like, for instance, a fraternity - wanted to have a nightly dinner in front of the Family Court building, attracting hundreds of hungry frat boys. We wouldn't allow that, either. This current frenzy over feeding should end.