Neighbors say Central Oregon resort project to cut too many trees
Neighbors of a new resort say too many trees will be cut for the project and they blame Deschutes County officials.
When finished, the Cascade Highlands resort will include 379 homes and a golf course, according to a county planning staff report.
The fundemental flaw with liberalism is that it relies on subjective rules. While conservatives believe that we have inalienable rights endowed upon us by our Creator and thatwe laws written to protect these rights and keep us from infringing on the rights of others, liberals believe that we have malleable rights that depend on the whim of people whose feelings might be hurt.
Who decides how many is "too many" trees to be cut down? I would say the landowner. Liberals would say that the neighbors, the government, the local tree hugger group and the snail darter get a say in how many is "too many."
Liberals get to define what is "tolerant," what is "culturaly competent," and what "diversity" is.
For those of you who support the subjective rules you need to realize that at some point they will be coming for you! Nothing is safe if we are relying on the whim of a handful of people.
15 comments:
oh bullshit daniel get your head out of your ass. wake up-- if we are concerned about responsibility of our actions it requires review of our acts.we all all siners and as such we must be punished.
Too many Californians are moving into the Bend area ... they should have deschutes county as screwed up as the PDX area shortly.
Cutting down trees on your own property is not an initiation of force, regardless of how much a bunch of lefty eco-freaks whine about it.
This was a poor example. Of course the neighbors should have a say in whether the trees should be cut down. If what you do on your land is substantially gutting the property value of my land, then it is very much my business.
You also seem to have omitted all of the details that don't support your philosophy. First, the very next paragraph of the article:
"But Richard Kauffman, the leader of the opposition to the development, has called a staff description of the resort site 'grossly inaccurate and misleading' in comments before a county hearings officer."
The rest of the article certainly bears him out on that claim. The party that you are calling the victims here are guilty of distorting the truth - while I don't know if that's grounds for any action against the resort, it does add a dimension to this story that makes any inferrence of a "liberal" agenda simplistic at best.
You also glossed over the fact that the opposition consists of neighbors. Not a bunch of college kids or hippies sticking their noses in where they don't belong, but homeowners with legitimate protests and tangible stakes in the situation.
I believe this - like many of the scenarios whose basic facts are exploited to be used as evidence for the "liberal agenda", "homosexual agenda", "anti-American agenda", have your pick - is in fact an individual case that involves individual people, and - as a liberal, mind you - I believe they have the right to work it out amongst themselves.
Which is not to say that universal principles aren't at stake. The owners of the resort do have a constitutional right to their property - unless deprived by due process. If it can be proven that the resort's actions are causing substantive suffering for these neighbors, then legislation against their actions may be appropriate. That, once again, is for the local democratic government to decide. This is fundamentally why government exists.
Now, would you kindly point out to me any of my reasoning in the above that you feel is "subjective"?
Kris!
I am a far rightwinger and I was born and raised in California. Please purchase a larger box!
Amy
It is not about "who decides", but who will decide. I am betting the majority rules on this one, call them "Liberals" if you will.
Daniel, one thing you need to remember is that this whole garbage of "...have inalienable rights endowed upon us by our Creator", is just opinion. The idea of a "creator" is subjective. The fact is we are a nation of man-made laws. We vote for officials that we want to enforce those laws. The last time I remember the "creator" being elected to office is oh...NEVER, so shut the f up with the religious crap. It is trash and you know it.
Have that view for your own household, but keep it to that. Did your "creator" want to deal those drugs, do that meth and gangbang. Maybe that was a different "creator". Regardless, it always seems that you pick and choose when to invoke the "creator". That is a "conservative" for you.
lefties, grow up
I think that counting a neighbor's trees as part of the value of a property is subjective.
I have watched neighbors change their property in ways I did not like. I never thought (still don't) that it was my place to go and tell him what he could or could not do.
He is not responsible for your view. Unless you had some type of contract or covenant with your neighbor regarding the trees on his land, you should have bought your property with the understanding that your neighbors trees might be gone some day.
Hey, kaelri, you blithering socialist, if my neighbor tells me I can't cut down MY tree, he might live long enough to reach his own property. BTW, when he mistook MY property as open range for his cattle, he was informed that the next time it happened, MY freezer would get filled with MY new-found beef. It didn't happen again. Property rights are fundamental to our American ideals. Please take your love of tyranny somewhere else.....sheesh.
Anonymous 12:34
[T]his whole garbage of "...have inalienable rights endowed upon us by our Creator", is just opinion.
You, sir (or maam) are an idiot!
But that's just my opinion.
Bear,
You are a complete pussy. You always talk so big, but that is it. I would love for you to try and hurt said "neighbor" or take his cattle for your freezer. I suspect your trees would be used to make the box you would be put to rest in.
I know if one of you Christian Soldiers tried to wreck my view, my property would be sold to the highest bidder in the landfill business.
Shaky Louie,
You sir, or madam are a complete waste of space. If that is all you can conjure up to defend the existence of a "creator", you prove Darwin's theory has validity. Get a pair and say why you believe anon is wrong.
"Hey, kaelri, you blithering socialist"
I assure you, Bear, that I would read what you have posted without any of the prefixing pablum.
I hold no claim to the idea of property value - agree or disagree, it's an integrated element of real estate and therefore a wholly tangible factor in a capitalist society such as ours.
I explained the matter of the Fifth Amendment in my first post. Constitutionally, the right is conditional. "No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." If this is what you think of as tyranny, then I'm afraid you're living in the wrong country.
Amy: I'll make an exception for conservative refugees from CA ... but most of the inmates of that state bring their voting habits with them, and have no clue why the problems they fled have followed them here.
As for property values:
If you want to benefit from someone else's trees, then pay him to not cut them. Buy an easement from your nieghbor, or STFU.
Cutting down vegitation in your yard is not equal to putting in a pig farm ...
Kaelri-welcome back. I would like to know why you assume that the agency that ok'd the developement is lying and distorting the truth and the neighbors are telling the truth. Have you visited the site? I didn't see in the article how many trees they wanted to cut down. Are 400 trees a lot on a parcel that they are building 375 houses and a golf course on? I don't know, must be a pretty large area.
Somehow I doubt that building a golf course on this land would be "substantially gutting the property value of my land as you say. With 3 bedrooms homes going for $600,000 in this area, I doubt if the people coming here would look at golf course negatively. Developement will happen as more and more people are forced here from the overcrowded cesspool that is California. Better to live next to a golf course than a Walmart or an apartment complex.
As a conservative, I believe the only way to guarantee what happens on the property next to mine is to own it.
Gun totin lefty
See, the thing is - I don't have to "prove" the existence of a Creator. Unlike you I don't have enough faith to believe that all of what I see around me is the result of random chance.
What I need is "proof" that there ISNT a God. Got any?
Explain, if you can, why the first woodpecker didn't drive its beak through it's skull the first time it attempted to bore into a tree. How would it have evolved if there was nothing to evolve from?
Sorry, but just saying _I_ don't have the balls to defend my belief in a Creator is proof of anything is ridiculous.
In fact, I called anon an idiot in what I considered a blanket statement regarding it's position (which I read as contrary) regarding the validity of the Founders belief in said Creator as mentioned in the Declaration of Independance...
Perhaps I should have posted a well thought out argument, but I didn't feel like it. And you, as a "lefty" should understand how important feeeellings are!
But as I said he's an idiot.
So, say what you will, call me names (I really can take it), but don't try to draw me into any phoney crap about proving to you, or anyone else, that God IS. Rather you prove to me that He isn't.
At The End your argument won't be with _me_ anyway!
PS. To repeat what I read on a bumper-sticker (and I know how lefties love bumper-sticker "wisdom")...
"If you're living like there is no God, you'd better hope you're right."
That's all. Have a nice day!
hey, gun toten, since my little property rights problems got solved, and remain so to this day, it seems that I walk my talk. You're just used to your lefty friends bloviating, and can't imagine what actual adults would do, or why.....stay on the porch if you can't play with the big dogs.....sheesh.
Post a Comment