Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kevao

I am of two minds.

On the one hand, there is the very straightforward business view, which the Supreme Court made US law yesterday.

On the other hand, there is the directly conflicting view that views the right to family privacy and the home as a fundamental human right. This is not currently US law, but it is currently French law.

If I were a Supreme Court justice, I would opt to favor the rights of the home.

Since I do not get to make that decision, but I am a real estate investor looking to maximize profit, I objectively view what the US Supreme Court did as making it easier to do land business in America, as compared to France where the protections of the home are more.

I am being serious, and part of being serious is acknowledging what I personally believe, but also what simply is, even if I don't prefer the morality of it.

The US Supreme Court decision is bad for the security of private citizens in their homes and good for real estate developers. Since it is now the law of the land in the US, until it is changed, obviously everyone who is in that industry will exploit it. Myself included.


1,435 posted on 06/24/2005 2:27:47 PM PDT by Vicomte13 (Et alors?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1427 | View Replies ]


To: Vicomte13

"The US Supreme Court decision is bad for the security of private citizens in their homes and good for real estate developers. Since it is now the law of the land in the US, until it is changed, obviously everyone who is in that industry will exploit it. Myself included."

Then you're no better than some Communist regime taking homes from people for development purposes.

This law won't last long. There will be a constitutional amendment and it'll pass like flying colors.


1,436 posted on 06/24/2005 2:33:01 PM PDT by pganini
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1435 | View Replies ]

To: Vicomte13
On the other hand, there is the directly conflicting view that views the right to family privacy and the home as a fundamental human right. This is not currently US law, but it is currently French law.

Bzzzzzzzzzt. Wrong. See Griswold Penumbras et al.

1,439 posted on 06/24/2005 2:41:28 PM PDT by jwalsh07 ("Su casa es mi casa!" SCOTUS 6/23/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1435 | View Replies ]

To: Vicomte13
I am of two minds.

Clearly.

I am being serious, and part of being serious is acknowledging what I personally believe, but also what simply is, even if I don't prefer the morality of it.

You're willing to profit off something you're morally opposed to? Ah, the French! Liberte, Egalite, Perversite.

I am a real estate investor looking to maximize profit, I objectively view what the US Supreme Court did as making it easier to do land business in America

ALL homeowners are real estate investors, mon ami. I bought my home as an investment, too. But I can't maximize my profit now. Some wealthy developer doesn't want to pay me what my property is worth to me, or what I know it's worth to the developer? No problem! Get the government to invoke eminent domain, and force me to sell out for what it determines to be "just compensation".

How Orwellian! (All real estate investors are equal; but some are more equal than others.) Again I say, Liberte, Egalite, Perversite.

I'm half French (maternal side) by the way. /shudder.

1,452 posted on 06/24/2005 4:53:35 PM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1435 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson