Michigan county threatens to demolish 14 Amish homes unless they give up their religious beliefs and upgrade their homes - The Daily Sheeple

submitted by Drewski from thedailysheeple.com

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Nemacolin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What a remarkable site to cite!

[–]Drewski[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

"We haven't corroborated any of this"

-CNN, probably

[–]Nemacolin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Perhaps you intended to post that on some discussion of CNN.

[–]MobiusRacetrack 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just in time for Christmas!

[–]DoctorKobras 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Yeah, how dare the county try to enforce building and sanitation codes.

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Agreed, they're a bunch of arbitrary rules that are selectively enforced by those in power. People have been living (and still live) without running water & electricity and using outhouses for hundreds of years, often times more sanitarily than those with it. They are being used as a tool for control, and to keep people dependent on the system.

[–]DoctorKobras 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Actually, I'm totally fine with those rules being enforced. Even in the highly biased article linked above, it admits that the authorities had been trying to enforce these rules for 14 years and only took action because of the offenders' stubbornness. Furthermore, it's worth noting that the Amish are highly selective about which technologies are banned under their supposedly God-mandated rules, often making exceptions on no other grounds than convenience.

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Who cares which technologies they choose to use though? It's their property, and their prerogative. If they aren't harming anyone the state should stay out of it.

[–]DoctorKobras 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

So you think people should be able to defy any law they want on their property?

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

It depends on the law. Laws should exist to protect the rights of the people. Bad laws like this, absolutely.

[–]DoctorKobras 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don't consider building and sanitation codes to be "bad laws." They're part of what differentiates the United States from the third world. These laws save lives.

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Demolishing someone's house because they don't have running water or electricity is a bad law (or enforcing it in a bad way). That's not saving someone's life; it's destroying it.

[–]DoctorKobras 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I'd agree if it was a case of them being unable to afford it. However, this is a case of deliberate defiance. You can't just break the law without consequences.

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

It's a matter of principle. The state could try to force us to buy all kinds of things we don't need or want, just because we can afford it doesn't make it ethical. They aren't harming anyone, they just want to be left alone to live the way they choose. Bad laws should be challenged and broken, and dealing with the consequences is a part of that decision.