Just because the barrier could be miles from the river does not mean the property owners cannot cross it and use the property between the barrier and the river. Thousands of people legally cross the border itself each day and the land between the barrier and the river is still in the USA, so while there may be some inconvenience, it doesn’t mean US citizens and legal aliens won’t be able to go there.
I agree with the first and disagree with the second. Our government has not protected this country from invaders, even after the 1986 agreement to do so. It’s now way past time for the wall.
Interesting that the very people who cried about property rights of “gay bakers” and other businesses are totes cool with the government stealing peoples’ land for the" greater good."
Eminent Domain is not stealing. It’s a well established and Constitutionally supported law of the land. And don’t pretend that you personally have not shared in that “greater good.”
PA laws exist, too, but that didn’t stop some of the very people in this thread complaining about “property rights” of the gay baker.
Whether I’ve “shared” in any “greater good” is not relevant.
I’m discussing the inconsistency of those who constantly cry about communist, socialist, fascist style “greater good” arguments from one side, but support “greater good” big government now.
Eminent Domain has been used extensively by every Administration since Eisenhower. And by every State and numerous local governments as well. Your TDS has got the best of you.
Isn’t property rights one of the core tenets of conservatism? I thought it was. Giving up my land, or money, or anything else I have worked to earn for the “greater good” sounds a bit like something entirely the opposite of conservatism.