 |
|
No, pickle is quite inconsistent here, as he is elsewhere.
Posted on: August 31, 2016 at 09:56:09 CT
JeffB MU
Posts:
72187
Member For:
21.42 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
He completely rejects the authority of governments who claim jurisdiction over land within the boundaries which they define. People who move to or purchase land within those boundaries are governed by the laws, bylaws, rules and so on by those entities, who impose penalties upon people who violate those bylaws, rules and laws. He accepts that as true for the HOAs because people agreed to those bylaws & future rules and bylaws which like other governmental laws & bureaucratic rules can be changed by a vote of those under their jurisdiction or by the officers they elected or the bureaucracy the officers appointed... and for children or others who inherit the properties under the HOA's jurisdiction even if they never agreed to nor would agree to the HOA's bylaws and assorted other rules and regulations and taxes/fees.
In other words he has a double standard, and again in this instance is inconsistent and hypocritical.
mizzou alum 93 is also spot on in pointing out the double standard he has with regards to what he considers to be an infringement on people's rights and whether or not it is moral for any entity to infringe upon those rights. One for instance would have to do with masturbating in front of children, whether in a movie theater or on a sidewalk in front of their schoolyard... or anywhere else. He has spoken out against enforcement of any laws prohibiting such conduct on the grounds that masturbating in front of children or anyone else is not an infringement of anyone's rights. Per his reasoning no one has a "right" to not be offended... but quite inconsistently, in this instance he thinks it's perfectly fine for the HOA to infringe upon the rights of a property owner to express his feelings by putting out a yard sign on his own property.
If this was some city or county or state or federal government doing this he would be freaking out about what a violation of the rights of the property owner this was.
Edited by JeffB at 10:03:09 on 08/31/16
In other words he has a double standard, and again in this instance is inconsistent and hypocritical.
mizzou alum 93 is also spot on in pointing out the double standard he has with regards to what he considers to be an infringement on people's rights and whether or not it is moral for any entity to infringe upon those rights. One for instance would have to do with masturbating in front of children, whether in a movie theater or on a sidewalk in front of their schoolyard... or anywhere else. He has spoken out against enforcement of any laws prohibiting such conduct on the grounds that masturbating in front of children or anyone else is not an infringement of anyone's rights. Per his reasoning no one has a "right" to not be offended... but quite inconsistently, in this instance he thinks it's perfectly fine for the HOA to infringe upon the rights of a property owner to express his feelings by putting out a yard sign on his own property.
If this was some city or county or state or federal government doing this he would be freaking out about what a violation of the rights of the property owner this was.
Edited by JeffB at 10:03:09 on 08/31/16
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
No, pickle is quite inconsistent here, as he is elsewhere. - JeffB MU - 8/31 09:56:09