I have a real problem with the concept of Emminent Domain, as has been discussed of late in the Kelo vs. City of New London case. I know there are voices on both sides of this argument, but I can not imagine anyone in favor of this decision, nor can I come up with a single example of a circumstance when this practice would be okay. I invite you to tell me your point of view. Perhaps you can soften my position on this issue.

I am not a complete stranger to this concept, by the way. My husband's childhood home and property was purchased by the school district to expand the neighboring elemenary school nearly 10 years ago. My inlaws were not broken hearted over this decision. The City paid them a fair price for the property. It offered them the opportunity to buy a new and better home in another community. On the down side of this scenario, the property was a 10 acre parcel that happened to be adjacent to my husband's grandparent's acreage. Father and Son had their homes on the far ends of about 20 acres of land at the edge of the town. My husband's grandparents (Grandpa in his 90s) still live on their portion of the land. The school now occupies the place where his son used to live.

I have another friend whose family built a dream home on an acreage in New Mexico. The interstate took their property -- and they were not happy about it. They battled for quite some time, wondering why the heck the road couldn't go around the house. After all, this was a fairly unpopulated area. They had carefully chosen a piece of land with the right view and sun exposures -- they put all their energy into planning and building this home. After 10 years (I think they were there for 10 years) they were informed that they were in the path of the road and they had to go. They would be given market value for the home. (sometimes the sum of the parts is worth more than the house would get in the open market. In some places (unlike California and New York) property values are surprisingly low.) They fought long and hard, and lost.

Emminent Domain is very clear in both these cases -- roads and schools are the top reasons any community can and will commandeer a private property. I don't necessarily like this, but I understand it. The new twist on this unsavory issue is that now big business will be allowed to do this. This is just utterly sickening to me. I can not understand how we could permit a private citizen the right to take by force another private citizen's property. I don't care how much you pay them! Some things must have a value far greater than that which can be counted in dollars and cents.

In California, property is at a premium. Coastal neighborhoods are especially inflated. This fact may actually protect private property owners, since the commandeering of a coastal home would cost the developer over a million a home to buy out. But say the developer decides that they want to buy an entire neighborhood to put up a luxury hotel -- or worse, take down an older neighborhood and replace it with a bunch of luxury homes? (This happens every day around here, by the way, without the need for "emminent domain" and government intervention. Money does the moving and the shaking. Somehow, developers hold all the cards all the time -- but that's another story for another day...). In CA, the property tax locks in with the sale price, so for arguments sake, it is ALWAYS beneficial for the government to push you out of your home. The taxes can only go up when someone new moves in. And how about fluctuations in the real estate market? What if I spend $500,000 for a home that is valued at $350,000 5 years from now? Then some developer decides that my property would make a great strip mall -- so they will buy this from under me at the current market rate. Would I have any recourse? Or do I lose everything?

I know the liklihood is that our high end properties are not in danger. As always, those with much, keep much. No, the likelihood is that those people that have little, that struggle much, that battle every day for their piece of the American Pie, that love with pride the piece they have managed to hack out -- those are the people that stand the most to lose.

I cannot help but think of our earlier policies of "Manifest Destiny". Perhaps I am infusing too much drama here -- but I can't sit silent awaiting this New Age Trail of Tears. I am reminded of Nathan's rebuke to David (2 Samuel 12:1-4) -- and pray to the God who really sees. ++Help us be a nation of good people. Turn the eyes of our leaders to You, and rebuke them for their unrighteousness.