Virginia Beach Church’s Saga With City Perfect Example Of Property Rights = Religious Liberty

By

May 16, 2012

While Virginia’s electorate will be focused on the presidential, U.S. Senate, Congressional and some local elections in November, pretty much in that order — and the Mainstream Media will be obsessed with the horse race and issueless aspects of the campaigns and protesting that the candidates are not addressing issues, all while ignoring the candidates’ issues — Virginians will have the opportunity to ratify an amendment to protect private property rights . We have made this a priority issue since  the Supreme Court’d deplorable 2005 decision in Kelo v. New London, Conn., that allowed government to take one’s property and transfer it to another private entity.

The ruling did say, however, that it was a state issue, and many states that did not have constitutional protections hurried to ratify the basic right of private property ownership into their state constitutions. But here in the Old Dominion, we did things the Virginia way . . . and dragged and dragged and dragged our feet some more. Finally, seven years after Suzette Kelo had her 100-year-old family home taken from her for an “economic development” project that was never built, this November Virginians will have the chance to ratify an amendment to the Virginia Constitution that will not only protect private property rights but also provide for just compensation for when eminent domain must be used for legitimate public uses.

We will provide more commentary and follow the ratification campaign as it develops this summer and fall. But for now, please view the video below (or click here) about Emmanuel Episcopal Church in Virginia Beach. Although a settlement with the city of Virginia Beach was reached a few days ago, this interview with its pastor and attorney Joe Waldo previous to the settlement shows just how important property rights are: In many respects, it is the first right, because without ownership of private property and its safeguard from the government, there is no guarantee of a place from which to speak freely, nor to worship, nor to make a living for one’s family.

For those who care about halting the growth of big government, of exercising restraint in government growth and limiting government’s power, this is the ultimate issue. With unchecked power of eminent domain, there is no limit on what government can take, how big it can grow or what it can do under the guise of “economic development” or any other expedient excuse it deems for the public good. Taking land is every bit a part of government’s addiction to expanding as taking families’ hard earned tax dollars.


Virginians will have the opportunity to end the tyranny of eminent domain in November by ratifying a constitutional amendment to the state constitution to protect private property rights from big government.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • LinkedIn
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Tumblr
  • email
  • Print

Tags: > > > > > >

8 Responses to “Virginia Beach Church’s Saga With City Perfect Example Of Property Rights = Religious Liberty”

  1. Great post. Thanks for keeping this issue before us, this one is important!

  2. familyfoundation says:

    Ryan Flanders: Nice to hear from you and thank you for the nice comments and for your support. You can bet we will be on this right up until election day. – Steve, The Admin

  3. David says:

    The Family Foundation cares about “halting the growth of big government, of exercising restraint in government growth and limiting government’s power”? Tell me how supporting SB484 (Abortion; informed consent) fits in with that statement.

  4. Mark Siegel says:

    David, having followed the FF for years, it hasn’t been difficult to see the common threads of their doctrine regarding government. If it requires extra tax dollars to help people and families; it constitutes government intrusion and overreach. If it doesn’t require extra taxes AND aligns with their selective approach to Biblical Scripture; then it’s full speed ahead!

  5. David says:

    They have supported unfunded mandates like posting “In God We Trust” in public schools, which of course demonstrates their “small government” mentality.

  6. David says:

    It takes a lot of “shootspah” to endorse small government philosophy while meddling in doctor-patient relationships.

    • Claire says:

      You’re forgetting, of course, that only they are capable and worthy of small government. Everyone else is just too sinful and ignorant.

  7. [...] ideals that often include turning the property over to larger private entities and developers. (Hampton Roads area governments have been particularly lustful of others’ property.) But this case is particularly heinous because not only does the NRHA want to forcefully take [...]

Leave a Reply