[sergeantdave]

In the 19th century the Mormons tried to form a religious association with a covenant that allowed polygamy. The federal government stepped in and said no. People can't just form a contractual association and do whatever they want. Eventually such an association may bump heads with the prevailing mores of the community.

I do agree, though, with the right of contractual associations. Just be prepared for a battle if it oversteps certain bounds or groups.

[Labyrinthos]

Eventually such an association may bump heads with the prevailing mores of the community.

As with any contract between private individuals, one or more provisions of a homeowners' agreement may be unenforceable if it is illegal, violates public policy, or is unconscionable. What bothers me about the debate is that Freepers are typically against government interference with private property rights, which includes the right of private parties to contract. Here we have a situation where numerous people -- including Andres -- have signed on to an agreement giving certain powers to the governing body of a HA, but Andres now wants to undo the deal in violation of the rights of the other parties to the agreement because he doesn't like how he's being treated. Too bad. He sued and lost -- twice. He should stop being an horse's behind and remove the free-standing flag pole, fly the flag from pole affixed to the house as the rules apparently require, and if he doesn't like living under a the rule of a homeowners' association, then he should sell his house and move someplace else.