Search This Blog

Monday, October 24, 2016

Property Rights Non-Politician Issues Statement

7 comments:

  1. It's easy to be an "I'm aginner" candidate ("i'm against everything" but for nothing). No benefit to Pocahontas County from the Atlantic Coast Pipeline? From 2019 to 2025, the project will generate just shy of $10 million in property taxes for Pocahontas County alone.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hard to tell exactly how much revenue it will bring in taxes, as I understand it that will depend partly on how much gas actually flows through. The assessed value of the project,and the annual taxes, will also decline as it ages. However the deciding issue for me is Eminent Domain. The County could receive revenue if it decided to confiscate every tenth person's property, maybe including yours,too. The foundation of prosperity is everry person's security in what they own and produce. "Eminent Domain" is a fancy legal-sounding term, but at bottom it is theft. Yes,I'm agin' it! John Leyzorek

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Further, some existing state aid to Poc CO will be cut by the increase in tax revenue we see,so little or no net gain

      Delete
  3. Mr. Leyzorek
    Would you allow non-christian religious displays such as (devil worship) to be placed along side the nativity on county owned land ?
    We have many outsiders moving in every year and many are liberals who hate seeing christian displays. So they try to place sick displays right beside nativities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What??? Sorry to tell you we have freedom of religion and that means all religions not just your's. You allow one religion to place a display on public property then any other religion is allowed to do the same. No matter if you think it's right or not. The government offices local and state must treat any and all religions the same.

      Delete
  4. That is a difficult one. It is not really a property rights issue,because we are talking about public not private property. I support anyone's right to put any sort of display on their own private property, however much it may offend me (or you). The Founder's perspective was that they did not want Government to take sides in sectarian disputes, like between the Baptists and the Presbyterians. A Calvinist may be very offended by a catholic statue of Mary Mother of God, seeing it as idolatry and therefore flat against the First Commandment. Maybe and I said "MAYBE" we could devise a Christian display for the Courthouse lawn so watered-down that it would offend against the doctrine of no Christian sect. WE could say,then, NO displays of any kind on Courthouse lawn..and you cannot say no RELIGIOUS displays but allow non-religious, because antireligion is itself a religion. Or we could affirm the right to assemble by allowing any kind of display, and we would get the KKK and the atheists and the Presbyterians and the satanists. Of course then the Methodists could peaceably assemble around the Satanist display and sing hymns and evangelize, at least until the satanists tried to re-enact Herod's massacre, when they would be morally obligated to use force. I would personally love to see a volunteer-provided Nativity on the Courthouse lawn, but it would not stop there. And until you want the Government to mediate among the Presbyterians and Calvinists and Jehovah's Witnesses and Baptists and Catholics and Mennonites and Coptics, Government better leave the Satanists alone, too.....UNTIL they commit a non-theological crime.

    ReplyDelete
  5. That is a difficult one. It is not really a property rights issue,because we are talking about public not private property. I support anyone's right to put any sort of display on their own private property, however much it may offend me (or you). The Founder's perspective was that they did not want Government to take sides in sectarian disputes, like between the Baptists and the Presbyterians. A Calvinist may be very offended by a catholic statue of Mary Mother of God, seeing it as idolatry and therefore flat against the First Commandment. Maybe and I said "MAYBE" we could devise a Christian display for the Courthouse lawn so watered-down that it would offend against the doctrine of no Christian sect. WE could say,then, NO displays of any kind on Courthouse lawn..and you cannot say no RELIGIOUS displays but allow non-religious, because antireligion is itself a religion. Or we could affirm the right to assemble by allowing any kind of display, and we would get the KKK and the atheists and the Presbyterians and the satanists. Of course then the Methodists could peaceably assemble around the Satanist display and sing hymns and evangelize, at least until the satanists tried to re-enact Herod's massacre, when they would be morally obligated to use force. I would personally love to see a volunteer-provided Nativity on the Courthouse lawn, but it would not stop there. And until you want the Government to mediate among the Presbyterians and Calvinists and Jehovah's Witnesses and Baptists and Catholics and Mennonites and Coptics, Government better leave the Satanists alone, too.....UNTIL they commit a non-theological crime.

    ReplyDelete

We are making comments available again! You are free to express your First Amendment Rights Here!

About Me

A local archivist who specializes in all things Pocahontas County