EDITOR – My husband and I were disturbed by this article, ‘Community rejects church services’ in the Highway Mail of Friday, 17 July, since we live in very close proximity to the little church mentioned and have absolutely no problem with its existence. The article mentioned a few negative reasons why the residents are against it practicing in our area.
1. Vehicles parked the length of our street and on our verges, restricting access – To be truthful this is not a problem. The verges outside the church and on the opposite side to it have been blocked off with trees stump cuttings so no vehicles could possibly mount those verges. The next lot of verges would be ours and they are certainly not using them. The vehicles are simply not a bother and I have no idea why they were mentioned as such.
2. The continuous stream of public transport delivering and collecting people – This complaint has never been noticed by my husband or me.
3. People standing around on our verges – The worshipers are in attendance at their church for the whole of Saturday. At some point in the day the parishioners are given approximately an hour off as a break. They do walk down our road and up again. This does not impede our privacy nor present a problem of loitering. Within the hour they are all back attending services.
4. Waste strewn – We have never, ever noticed this.
5. Noise – The church service continues for most of the day without any disturbance to us. At most, we sometimes hear a faint bit of music from the singing of a hymn or two. On a Friday evening, however, our area is bombarded with noise from 7pm until after 12 midnight with music from the Ashley Sports Field pub. No one seems to be complaining about that. Also, the central mosque cries out at least three times a day with the call to prayer – no one seems to seeing a problem with this practice. Why is it that this little church in Ashley should be the target of such nasty complaints?
My husband and I, as long time residents of Second Avenue in Ashley, would like to say that we do not object to the little church practising in our area and have not, to date, experienced any of the complaints laid down. We object, however, to being included in these complaints through the article.
Marilyn and Douglas Clark
Ashley
