Column for August 24, 2006

Anyone who has read any of my writings knows that I am a strong supporter of liberty. I tend to follow in the footsteps of the "founding fathers" and often look back to many of their writings. It is no different for this column.

The Town of Selma is going to condemn numerous properties in town. These properties are largely abandoned, dilapidated, and neglected. If someone wants to allow their property to sit in such a condition, it is their right to do so. In our Declaration of Independence, we read the familiar phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

That "pursuit of happiness" was nearly "estate", "property", or another synonym. John Locke wrote before the Declaration about "life, liberty, and estate". That is how highly the regard for personal property was held in the country's early days. As a matter of fact, the phrase "life, liberty, and property" was actually included in the Declaration of Colonial Rights, adopted by the First Continental Congress on October 14, 1774.

However, with rights comes responsibility. John Locke also wrote "no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions". If someone wishes to abrogate that responsibility and the property therefore becomes a public nuisance or danger, then the property rights cease.

I remember during the 2005 town council election season when a property owner approached me, a candidate, and expressed to me his dismay about the town enforcing an ordinance requiring tall grass within the town limits to be kept mowed. He, too, believes in private property rights. When someone's property affects mine because of vegetation overgrowth, debris, vermin, odor, or dilapidation, there is a dividing line between where his rights end and mine begin. When my property value is affected by someone else's misuse of property and abrogation of responsibility, it becomes the responsibility of a local government to step in.

The idea of an ordinance, building code, or governmental standards pertaining to property is not a new concept. In 1790 to 1750 or so B.C., the ruler of the Babylonian empire, Hammurabi, instituted a building code of sorts. Within "The Code of Hammurabi" were laws governing property damage and construction. They were obviously nowhere near as elaborate as today's code, but the need to address such issues is certainly nothing new.

I don't know many people who strongly support personal liberty as I do. This is in a theological sense as well as in the secular world in which we live. I learned a long time ago to deviate from legalism in its various forms. However, along with that freedom, I also always preach responsibility. The two are seldom preached in couplet.

It is a lack of personal responsibility that claims that one's rights are being infringed upon when restrictions are placed upon those rights by reason of personal action (or lack thereof). I take that same position when it comes to topics such as abortion and freedom of the press. When television networks complain about governmental censorship over irresponsible language, sexuality, and behavior, I have little sympathy for their cause. When women use the guise of personal liberty to abrogate responsibility caused by a lack of responsible behavior and choose to slaughter the life of an innocent child, I have little sympathy for their cause.

I am glad to see that the Town of Selma is attempting to make this "A Charming Place to Be". Issues such as substandard properties that affect not only the neighboring properties but the entire town are being dealt with. As mentioned in one town council meeting, some property owners have requested town assistance for compliance with the reasonable request of maintaining their own property. Rightly stated by Mayor Hester, it is not the town's responsibility to provide funds to that end. It is, however, the property owners' responsibility to maintain their own property in order to maintain their rights to that property.