[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: [at-l] freedom
- From: kahley7 <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 20:08:43 -0700
At 11:37 PM 8/26/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Define what you mean by "freedom" before anyone CAN answer. If we aren't
>all speaking of the same thing we'll be talking in circles.
I am on thin ice here because I am not expert in the Constitution but I
the freedom envisioned by our founding fathers when they laid out what
powers the government could exercise and retained everything else for the
And in this case, the freedom to do what you wish to with your own property
as long as it does no physical harm to your neighbors or your neighbor's
I have seen reference to the point that "he knew the trail was up there when
he bought it.I My question is, was there a rider or convenient (is that
the right term)
or restrictions on the deed that hinted that the government could exercise such
decision making authority? If so, my sympathies for him are reduced. But
my concerns about the broader issues remain.
>The reforestation and protection of the environment that I've encountered
>ALL came from those dreaded *GOVERNMENT* programs that private enterprise
I have made enquiries about this and will post replies. I was referring to
the huge chunk of
state game and state forest lands which occupies soo much of the central
and northern central
part of the state. I was told that these lands belonged to the lumber
sold them at a reduced rate to the state with the proviso that selected
could be continued. I'm trying to find out if this is true info or not.
> A part of our "freedom" is to join together to
>protect the interests of the larger community in the face of those whose
>only interest is in private profit.
Ok....we should have banded together and raised the money to pay the man what
he wanted for the land. A win-win situation.
He gets what he wants and we get what we want and it's all voluntary.
No one is compelled to do anything or restricted from doing anything against
Thousads of people have written letters. but it is my position that letter
is the extent of their passion. If thousands of people would have recruited
thousands of friends and had thousands of fund raisers and worked their tails
off for a year, the money would have been raised. But that would have
involved real commitment.....sacrifice. We claim Saddleback is priceless
our children but are unwilling to devote more than a few hours to ensure it's
Nooooo with a few seconds of typing and hit the send button and we are a
.we did our part.
What we did is to encourage, through government exercise of a power
that they did not have a few scant centuries ago, the changing of the
value of a person's
property because we don't like what he planned to do with it. That man's
freedom to do what he wants with his own property has been
obliterated. His personal
freedom has been diminished. Because taking is easier than paying.....
The support for the saving of Saddleback is a mile wide and an inch deep.
Just like the support for the environment of those who readily demand that
others alter their lives while they do little to diminish their own impact.
It;s easy to demand that someone_else_sacrifice for the good of all
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | http://www.backcountry.net *