Related Information to Your Home Or The People's

Your Home Or The People's

Humans normally see their home as a base, secure domain or 'castle' set up to fit their own likes and dislikes, in fact there should be no other place that one can feel most free, but not necessarily so. With the advent of laws, technology and so on it is possible for one person's home to influence another's peace of mind. Noise pollution is an example of this. The question is... should laws govern what you can and cannot do in your home? If they should, to what extent?

Peoples The Home Your

As have studied the gospel and politics over the years I am amazed at the parallel between the two and property itself is a central principle.

That is a whole essay, but there is also a parallel between the individual and the family and the country.

The home is to the family what the nation should be to the citizens of it; I think many problems in the world would be solved if people adhered to such an idea.

Just as an individual has the right to his own self-determination within the sphere of his own body (namely to think, to make decisions, to exercise conscience and to act (that is, use his body) on those decisions so long as it does not violate the same rights in others) so I submit does a family within their own home.

The home is a fundamental part of society - and by home I mean both the family and the property (legally protected exclusiveness). If there is no property than that ability to make decisions and act is limited.

All that takes place in a home is private and my only become a matter for government if (a) one member violates the fundamental rights of another member of the home, or ( material is broadcast from the home, whether sound or images, or other substances, that may affect the rights of those it influences - even then this matter should be decided privately if possible before involving the *local* government.

The home should indeed be a castle, and a castle has defences. Strong defences against those who have no invitation.

That's all I'll say for now

Dubhdara.

Your Home Or The People's History & Civil Business Politics

Property can be taken for development-Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that a city can take a person's home for a development project aimed at revitalizing a depressed local economy, a decision that could have nationwide impact.

By a 5-4 vote, the high court upheld a ruling that New London, Connecticut, can seize the homes and businesses owned by seven families for a development project that will complement a nearby research facility by the Pfizer Inc. drug company.

Under the U.S. Constitution, governments can take private property through their so-called eminent domain powers in exchange for just compensation, but only when it is for public use.
Ref. https://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=8873080

Peoples The Home Your

This is a case that should cause every American to be writing, calling, mailing and emailing their congress person, senator and the president. The U.S. Constitution says that government can seize a persons land only when it will have clear benefit to the community and the owner must be justly compensated. In the past this has only been used build things like hospitals, roadways or other government buildings that are a clear advantage to the community. With this new ruling by the Supreme Court the door has been opened to allow any private organization to approach a local government and claim that they can generate more tax revenue than the homeowner can and the local government can force a home owner to leave.

Consider what will happen if a wealthy developer donates large amounts of money to a local town board and then wants to put a office building in a residential area, but doesn't want to pay what the cost of the house are to buy out the owners. It doesn't take to much to imagine the town board forcing the people to move.

To find the address of you congress person, or senator check these link:

US House of Representatives

US Senate

Peoples The Home Your

I don't believe the State should interfere in somebody's home. There are of course exceptions to this, eg. domestic violence or certain criminal activity. But nothing else.

I certainly don't agree intelligence officers or the federal police should have the right to raid somebody's home and seize whatever they want without a proper warrant. I don't care if they suspect terrorism in this instance, what sort of society are we trying to protect if we have no civil liberty.

I think however people should respect laws which could affect the environment and neighbours eg noise pollution etc.

I'm not surprised developers are starting to buy out homes in the States. It seems there is a price on everything there, which is disturbing. I fear for the day such extreme capitalism comes to my country.

Offtopic but, There is a great Australian movie about this whole subject called the Castle. It's hilarious, highly recommend it!

Your Home Or The People's

Arvhic,

It is capitalism that protects your home, the case above shows what happens when government violates the concept of private property/the free market whether it does that through its own agencies or in agreement with other so-called capitalist corporations, it is the same. And when corporations form agreements with government (or become controlled by them) they cease to become capitalist. It's just another form of collectivist statism.

Your Home The People's

Don't get me wrong, I support capitalism. It is the spirit of being able to do something better than the other person at a cheaper price and still make money that has made the U.S. economy as strong as it is. It has be the capatalism economy that has allowed the U.S. to provide more $8 billion in aid to other nations. What I do not support is when my government abused the constitution that they swore to defend. This is a case of judges not doing their jobs.

Your Home The People's Politics Business Civil & History

I take your point and I'm not having a go at capitalism because it is the type of society I would prefer to live in. But I think if developers are being given licence to demolish homes than it needs to be regulated. There are basic rights that should be protected against corporate greed.

I think everyone is entitled to feel a level of protection and privacy from the State with regard to their homes. Look at what is happening in Zimbabwe, it's terrible. Of course it's a completely separate issue but the feeling of being displaced would be horrible under any circumstances.