There was a recent Supreme Court decision regarding the right of local government to employ Eminent Domain to "take private property". At issue was the scope of the Fifth Amendment, which allows the taking of the land if it is for "public use." (restoring blighted areas, building highways etc.)
In this case, a PRIVATE developer would use the land for office buildings, or a mall. The local government won. The private developer won. The people lost ownership of their homes and property, and we lost a piece of what we are.
The documents so important to the structure and function of our country, mean absolutely nothing if we permit the most important words in them to be redefined. In this case our Supreme Court has redefined "Public Use". Our societal horizon is slowly being littered with re-defined words. Significant aspects of our nation are being changed. Change is not necessarily a bad thing, but erosion is another matter all together.
I applaud those who are now legally trying to grab Supreme Court justice Souter's home, destroy it and build a hotel (public use). Souter and his four constituents in this case have not interpreted the Constitution. They have instituted a private agenda.
To paraphrase a comment by comedian George Carlin: "Iraq is having a problem writing a constitution. Why don't we just give them ours. We're not using it anymore."
As much as possible, it's quite necessary to observe and stand in judgement of those behind the changes being promoted. It may not be long before you'll be required to get up off your but and take a personal stand on this stuff.
We employ tolerance to promote peace and continuity, but greed and reckless ideologies shouldn't be part of what we put up with. (Joseph Holbrook ©2005 )
In this case, a PRIVATE developer would use the land for office buildings, or a mall. The local government won. The private developer won. The people lost ownership of their homes and property, and we lost a piece of what we are.
The documents so important to the structure and function of our country, mean absolutely nothing if we permit the most important words in them to be redefined. In this case our Supreme Court has redefined "Public Use". Our societal horizon is slowly being littered with re-defined words. Significant aspects of our nation are being changed. Change is not necessarily a bad thing, but erosion is another matter all together.
I applaud those who are now legally trying to grab Supreme Court justice Souter's home, destroy it and build a hotel (public use). Souter and his four constituents in this case have not interpreted the Constitution. They have instituted a private agenda.
To paraphrase a comment by comedian George Carlin: "Iraq is having a problem writing a constitution. Why don't we just give them ours. We're not using it anymore."
As much as possible, it's quite necessary to observe and stand in judgement of those behind the changes being promoted. It may not be long before you'll be required to get up off your but and take a personal stand on this stuff.
We employ tolerance to promote peace and continuity, but greed and reckless ideologies shouldn't be part of what we put up with. (Joseph Holbrook ©2005 )
JOSEPH HOLBROOK
REDEFINING “PUBLIC USE”