« Praying With An Atheist | Main | Holy Humor »

April 24, 2009

Comments

John Meunier

But it was a lovely rant.

Earl

Regardless of what anyone might think of her, this woman has every right to be angry at being restricted from developing her property. The property is her legal possession. She has every legal right to develop her property in precisely the manner she sees fit. If she so chooses, she has the same legal right to not develop the property.

No matter how laudable might be the desire to protect the environment, to restrict the prerogative of this woman in the full use of her land constitutes an unjust taking as she is forced to bear the consequent loss of value to her property, this due directly to her being restricted from the free use of her own property.

The rights of a property owner are not trumped by environmental sensitivities. If for a public good a property owner is to be restricted from the full use of their property, then it is only equitible that they be compensated for what would have been the full market value of the land had they not be restrained from developing it.

Seeking to protect the environment is not wrong. But it is absolutely wrong to take property or deny a property owner the use of their property and thereby force them to bear the cost of protecting the environment.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Kiva

Categories