| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,942,580
|
Article: 19814
[Pagan]
Date Posted:
7/6/2008
7:21:46 pm EDT
Wvox Stats
Views: 4,304
RSS: 11,235
Comments: 15
|
Hansen: Fence, Not Paganism, Dividing Neighbors
Author: Marc Hansen Source: Des Moines Register (IA)
Title: HANSEN: FENCE, NOT PAGANISM, DIVIDING NEIGHBORS
I went out to the southeast side of town the other day and talked to the main players in the great pagan-symbol fence feud.
This isn't your traditional stay-off-the-grass, baseball-in-the-flower-bed, next-door-neighbor controversy. It involves religion, censorship and First-Amendment rights.
Just be glad you aren't involved. The ACLU could be called in before it's over.
On one side of the wooden privacy fence is Ryle MacPebbles, who has a wife, two preschool girls and a name that belongs in a Larry McMurtry novel. He's also on disability after suffering a terrible fall while working a construction job.
MacPebbles put up the fence because he thought the next-door neighbor lady was spying on him. Then he took a can of black paint and sprayed pagan symbols on the side of the fence that she sees. To keep her from peeking in, he hung a tarp with more symbols above the fence.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 15 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| In Fact... | Jul 7th. at 10:46:30 pm EDT
|
Katmandu (elba, Alabama) - Email Me
if he were to ever wish to rectify the situation, he'd supply the paint and labor to cover the stuff on the fence side not facing his house. And as for the concept of "he built it, so both sides are his," it is a basic cultural concept that irregardless of who builds a fence, each of the sharing parties only has ONE side. What if the roles had been reversed here folks? What one person does on their side of a fence is their issue. What that person does on the side belonging to someone else is that someone else's issue. And in this case, it has become an internet-wide issue.
|
| Couple Of Points | Jul 7th. at 9:36:01 pm EDT
|
Christopher Blackwell (Deming, New Mexico) - Email Me
Couple of points, it may be his fence but he had to trespass onto her property to paint the Heathen Runes and Wiccan Pentacle, nether which is Druid, though he seems unaware of that. Now Ogam is what he should have used. [Grin] If he was a Druid, he would know that.
Now since the symbol are on her side of the fence, why does she not hire someone to sand blast them off or paint over them? That is what I would do, end of that particular problem.
Seems to me that both these people are drama queens.
|
| As Bugs Bunny Said... | Jul 7th. at 6:08:38 pm EDT
|
Dana Corby (Anderson Island, Washington) - Email Me
..."What a maroon!"
Ryle MacPebbles presents as an angry, paranoid, poorly-controlled man. It's one thing to build a fence and quite another to then rub the Nosy Neighbor's nose in the things she most dislikes about him. There are other, subtler ways to deflect ill-will, but did MacPebbles use them? No, he chose the 'method' most likely to exacerbate the ill-will. Not too bright.
He also seems not to know much about Pagansim, and next to nothing about Druidry: being a Druid does not make you 'almost a minister' any more than being a Christian does. It makes you a member of that faith group, period.
(Shaking my head) I wish Paganism attracted fewer fruitloops, and that the fruitloops didn't get all the press attention!
BB,
Dana Corby
Wiccan HPS
Druid Bard & Companion
|
| Comes Down To This: | Jul 7th. at 4:12:46 pm EDT
|
Eric Wolfborn (Jenkintown, Pennsylvania) - Email Me
If the fence is entirely on his property, he can paint any symbols all he wants. Runic languages are no more offensive than painting the alphabet.
If, however, the fence is not entirely on his property, it's shared and he can only paint on the side facing him.
If it's entirely on her property, she has control.
Seems cut and dry to me. Then again, I'm not a tool.
|
| Technical Legal Details, Not Colloquial Meanings | Jul 7th. at 3:11:24 pm EDT
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me
It's important in a case like this to determine the technical meanings of words in the specific legal context, and not erroneously assume other colloquial word definitions apply when they differ from those of a law such as this city's "graffiti" ordinance. It appears the city has reviewed its position and admitted to the same error some commenting here have made, given that the legal nature of graffiti under that law is based on art or speech imposed as vandalism on public property or private property one neither owns nor has permission to use, and not on the subjective nature or content elements of such speech.
It also appears that a trespass and access issue may be present, such that it was only practical to do crude rune and other renditions on this fence with spray paint, rather than more careful paintings or woodworking of symbols.
However, the city's latest position is also problematic, and raises additional issues of law and definitions.
[Web LINK]
The issue of definition I see there is what constitutes a "sign", versus "decorations" intrinsic to the style of trim on a fence, house eave, or other structure, or "design elements" of that fence (or other structure) ? Perhaps these fence markings aren't signs per se, under stated or interpreted meanings of the sign permit ordinance, any more than they were "graffiti" under wrongful interpretations of law?
If they are "signs", does the ordinance apply to them? In some cases such as one assisted by the VA ACLU where a resident posted two plywood 4' x 8' painted displays along the road in front of his house detailing why he thought local politicians were crooks and should be prosecuted as such, it was found that a sign ordinance designed to regulate primarily commercial speech generally only entitled to "intermediate scrutiny" interpretation of the 1st Amendment could not be fully applied to explicit expression of political grievance, entitled to higher "strict scrutiny" legal review and the same freedom from content censorship litigants in Hess v IN or Cohen v CA demanded in use of "Fvck" before all ages audiences, or that naturists, PETA activists, and topfree equality activists, as well as artists, have litigated to protect their rights against overbroad and oppressive nudity laws. In legal theory, religious expression is in the same legal class as political or artistic expression of those types courts have found trump laws designed around commercial speech standards. As such, this sign ordinance in these circumstances may not be valid unless read more loosely than its literal specification, if in fact these fence markings are in fact a sign rather than some other form of decoration that's merely part of the fence. If so, it's wrong to coerce the owner to buy a $35 permit for the same reasons a $1.50 poll tax to exclude blacks was an illegal tactic to abridge rights, even if it may be easier for Mr. MacPebbles to buy the permit than litigate the issue and prove the city wrong. If the city were to push the sign ordinance and lose in court, they could end up paying off a $30,000 legal reimbursement to the state ACLU, plus its own legal folly costs, as well as remind present and future bureaucrats why investment in clear statutory construction and mature interpretation and enforcement can be less costly than reckless operation of government.
This article also documents how Mr. MacPebbles really did try to be a nice neighbor and help out the complainant against his runes, before resorting to isolationist tactics. The crude runes seem like a rather polite way to state the apparent real message of recent weeks, suggesting perhaps that the neighbor might best sit on the splinters of one of his fence posts, and rotate. Relative to that likely message, at least he's remaining somewhat polite and positive in what's depicted on the fence.
It looks like this neighbor won't be getting much free neighborly help any time soon when her carpal tunnel is acting up. It also looks like a few hours of review by a city attorney could save tens of thousands if ordinances are misapplied, based on presumed word meanings rather than valid interpretation of both clear definitions and tricky contextual issues of classes of speech.
Find More info -- HERE
|
| Rules May Determine The Outcome.... | Jul 7th. at 2:52:14 pm EDT
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me
I had neighbors that wanted to know just about every aspect of my life by peering into my windows and going through my mail every chance they got. I got a box at the post office after a conversation with a neighbor revealed she knew about my Aunt being in the hospital- before I received the letter telling me about it- which mysteriously appeared in my mailbox the next morning- long before the postman was due to arrive.
We finally put up a privacy fence on one side in order to be able to sit outside-alone without having them "join us" every moment they knew we were out there, and that was just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. We were not the only ones to suffer under their "regime", but we were the most recent.
Sometimes neighbors do go out of their way to make nuisances of themselves to people they don't like but find they live near, and so they agitate trouble in order to control either the spaces next to them or the neighborhood in general.
My guess, is that the Pagan symbols were sprayed on more as an act of defiance rather than any other reason, which is why they look the way they do. For that, I can't really blame him, but if it brings in the city, it's a self defeating purpose. While both sides of the fence may be "his side"-he is still subject to city ordinances if his fence sits exactly on his property lines. The only way he could escape such ordinances- would be if both sides of his fence are well inside his property line by at least an inch. Poles with Pagan symbols inside his yard would have been a better choice.
|
| Bad Neighbors | Jul 7th. at 2:07:35 pm EDT
|
Finn (San Marcos, Texas) - Email Me
They both sound like bad neighbors to me. Any validity to his argument is undermined by the fact that he only put them on the side facing this one woman. He didn't cover his fence in all directions with the 'protective' symbols. He just wanted to irritate her. They are unattractive. If I was his neighbor I'd ask they be removed too. If we were reading an article about a person who rudely started plastering crosses and Christian logos all over their fence at a Pagan residence I imagine the outrage and annoyance would be intense. This has nothing to do with Paganism whatsoever.
|
| I'm Sad To Say... | Jul 7th. at 1:16:13 pm EDT
|
Liz (Lawrenceville, Georgia) - Email Me
that this guy kind of makes me ashamed to share the moniker of Pagan with him....
|
| I Must Say. . . | Jul 7th. at 1:11:12 pm EDT
|
Tempest (Oxnard, California) - Email Me
To those saying "do it on your side of the fence," I have to say, both sides are his side of the fence! In order for a neighbor to build a fence it must be totally on her/his property. Since it does on exceed the property line, he has every right to paint his sigils, no matter how atrociously, on either side of HIS fence.
I am not going to comment on the cameras and such as none of us, except those immediately involved in this, know what is really going on. Yeah, yeah, we know whats going on because the article says so *rolls eyes*, believe that if you will, but we all know how the media twists things around.
|
| Freedom? | Jul 7th. at 9:44:10 am EDT
|
Nacine Moonglow (Uehling, Nebraska) - Email Me
Freedom for who? I also live in a small town and yes there are people all over this world who have no family perhaps or other reasons that they may do things that make us uncomfortable. Use understanding. A fence was built, let it go already. subjecting someone daily to something they don't believe in is unfair and rude. Put them on your side of the fence and let it go. As pagans we spout off about insisting we have our freedom to express ourselves....we spout off about the Christian faith shoving their ideals and beliefs etc. in our face then why is it o.k. and even applauded on this website for someone to do something like this? Treat others as you/we want to BE treated. You don't have to profess your faith from a rooftop in order to be heard.......a quiet respectful faith answered inteligently when asked about it usually goes way further. I know it has with my neighbors. They don't mind my cauldrons in my yard and actually come over occaisionally when I have one lit over a fire just to chat. This took 3 years. From a fence to a tarp to cameras........sorry but it sounds to me like this guy has some other paranoid issues other than his neighbor looking out her windows (perhaps not even at him) ! Is he maybe on meds or should he be? Did his construction accident involve a head injury that is perhaps contributing to this extreme paranoia? Where are supporting comments from his wife about all this or is she sitting inside just embarrassed to death? In all my years if you wanted to decorate your fence with whatever....you did it on your side of it.
|
| Wonder When They'll Start Working? | Jul 7th. at 8:40:04 am EDT
|
Michael Welch (Audubon, New Jersey) - Email Me
I'd say that they already have.
|
| De Javu All Over Again... | Jul 6th. at 11:34:16 pm EDT
|
Katmandu (elba, Alabama) - Email Me
Coraxo has a point, that could be called graffiti. Some nice carvings or yard decorations would serve the home protection purpose. These folks just now seem to be like quarralling (excuse my spelling) kids. Tarps? Cameras? What the....?
|
| Wow. | Jul 6th. at 8:43:40 pm EDT
|
Mysteries Child (Garfield, Arkansas) - Email Me
They both sound like nasty little b*tches.
Basically, then, this has nothing to do with a fence, or with religion. It has to do with neighbors being neighbors, the Number One reason that, no matter how crappy my house may be, I'm glad I live waaaaay out in the flippin' boonies.
I'm all for his free exercise, and his freedom of speech and expression.
Even if those are some ugly flippin' inscriptions.
I just don't like people very much.
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
