Judge Blocks Libertarian fundraiser on Private Property...

[ArmedBear]

If his nudist colony was near a school, church or other area where it could reasonably be construed to be a "nuisance"

Now this is an issue that chaps my hide. Here in San Diego, we have ordinances about certain establishments' proximity to churches and schools. Now let's leave aside schools and talk churches.

Say I have a strip club, and some jerk opens a church next door then gets the city to shut me down. This sort of thing happens here.

Why, exactly, does the church have special rights that I don't?
Why can't I, as a law-abiding stip club owner, get the city to shut down the church? I mean, what strip joint customer wants to look at a damned church as he gets out of his car?

I see this as a violation of the 1st Amendment. Religion should not take precedence over some other lawful activity in the eyes of the law, any more than religion should be discouraged or banned by the law.

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

ArmedBear, I don't mean to hijack the thread with a Libertarian critique, but Libertarians are still crippled by the Rothbardian tendency to neve compromise. They want all taxes gone so bad, they aren't willing to accept one small tax cut with a subsequent budget cut. If We get our act together and use incrementalism to our advantage, we can make advances. Alot of people agree with us.

As for this whole nudist thing. It is irrelevant. They weren't being nude in public. Folks in that kind of lifestyle like to keep their thing out in the country, or away from crowds. What the leo guys did was unconstitutional in any event. The court order backing them was unconstitutional.

 

[UnintendedConsequences]

I thought the First Amendment existed in every state

I thought the First Amendment existed in every state, not just the one's where judges feel free to allow it. Perhaps I have misjudged the state of Kansas. I thought they had government employees who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I guess not. In that case, I guess each individual has to protect their own natural rights as the government there most certainly won't.

I will have to remember that if I ever visit that state.

 

[MechAg94]

There is more to this story than originally posted. Read all the posts.
It sounded like the location was the key factor not the people or the speech.

 

[UnintendedConsequences]

Is the First Amendment a limited natural right?

While there may be more to the story, as I have read all the posts, what it boils down to me is the fact that it appears a judge thinks that the First Amendment is a limited natural right, therefore, a privledge that can be recended at a whim.

If one loses all their Constitutional rights because they own, operate or work for a business, then would that not mean our rights are nothing but government granted privledges?

Additionally, if a goverment official refuses to uphold their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, then they by default walk the path toward treason. The sheriff has no obligation to uphold something that he feels violates the Constitution. It would be the same if he was given a court order to confiscate all private property without due process or just compensation.

 

[gc70]

Unless someone can post a link to an additional source, I have not seen enough information to be able to reach any sort of reasoned conclusion about the court order.

As to whether the First Amendment guarantees limited or unlimited rights, of course the rights are limited. Think about it for a few minutes and you can come up with dozens of situations in which freedom of assembly is limited. How about getting together with a few buddies in the operating room of a public hospital? Or maybe a bunch of curious folks decide to personally investigate a current crime scene. Or just a few close friends decide to share fellowship in a condemned building.

 

[TCB in TN]

First Ammendment should not be limited!

There is no way the 1st should ever be limited, now where you exercise your 1st ammendment rights is a different story. If you are talking about public property then yes a permit is a reasonable step, but on private property? I don't know about that!