Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is very American to tolerate different opinions on subjects. It is a virtue to welcome different opinions when we realize that no one person knows everything. We seem to be drifting away from these ideals.
Here is an example: The Villages: Where Republicans rule - Salon.com
This is incorrect. The constitution defines the rules the GOVERNMENT has to respect. It doesn't apply to private parties. There may or may not be local laws that control the rules HOAs can impose on their residents, but the constitution doesn't come into play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonyafd
You speak of rules. There is a book of rules called the constitution. Among those rules there is freedom of expression. Republican I've noticed that you suspend these rules like when a Republican governor oked the murder of four students in 1970.
Don't speak to me of rules. Any HOA bylaw or covenant that violates the constitution is illegal.
This is incorrect. The constitution defines the rules the GOVERNMENT has to respect. It doesn't apply to private parties. There may or may not be local laws that control the rules HOAs can impose on their residents, but the constitution doesn't come into play.
Nonsense!
The Bill of Rights is specifically for individuals. Civil rights laws were written for individuals. Any rule that an HOA passes that is in violation of the law, local, state, or federal is null and void. Don't confuse the corporate power of the purse string with the law. This caveat written into agreements on a continual basis is "this offer is null and void where it violates the law".
I sited two sources in this thread, the first in post #1 and the second in post #11 to make my point about American billionaire authoritarians. The article about Francis Durr in post 1 goes into how he was singled out and was threatened in a community where several of his neighbors displayed signs for Mitt Romney unhindered by the community management. The article in post #1 and post #11 talks about how the developer solicited campaign contributions from Villages employees for Mitt Romney. The article in post #1 goes further in describing how one employee had his hours drastically reduced when he refused to donate.
Both articles describe how Democrats are treated as second class citizens in the Villages in some detail. So what's next? broken windows and swastikas?
This is incorrect. The constitution defines the rules the GOVERNMENT has to respect. It doesn't apply to private parties. There may or may not be local laws that control the rules HOAs can impose on their residents, but the constitution doesn't come into play.
From the article in the Huffington Post which directly contradicts your statement above:
In her letter to the developer on behalf of the Durrs, Marti Green, a retired lawyer and Villages resident, noted that the community was virtually slathered with Romney signs. If the development wouldn’t order all political signs to be taken down, the threat to sue the Durrs over their Obama signs would be considered “harassment of Obama supporters by The Villages.â€
“Rest assured ... that if anyone commences litigation, the Durrs will aggressively
pursue their legal and constitutional rights, including seeking damages against The Villages and yourself for violation of their freedom of speech, harassment, and malicious prosecution,†Green wrote. She has not received a response from the developer.
Still, the Durrs took their Obama sign out of their front window and moved it to the backyard, where they affixed it to a rocking chair. Francis Durr did, however, keep a small sign in the front window, an American flag with a small picture of Obama in the lower corner. He figured it’s unlikely anyone will raise a stink about it since it features Old Glory.
“I’m thick-skinned,†Francis said. “I’m not going to be intimidated by anybody.â€
Besides, he added, the political hostility couldn’t possibly last beyond the election.
It was written for individuals vs THE GOVERNMENT, not versus private parties.
Try holding a protest inside a mall, and see have fast you get trespassed by the police when the mall cops call them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonyafd
Nonsense!
The Bill of Rights is specifically for individuals. Civil rights laws were written for individuals. Any rule that an HOA passes that is in violation of the law, local, state, or federal is null and void. Don't confuse the corporate power of the purse string with the law. This caveat written into agreements on a continual basis is "this offer is null and void where it violates the law".
I have friends who live in the Villages and this is basically another liberal complaining that they don't want to follow the same rules everyone else has to live by. They want to be "special". non story.
But everyone else is NOT having to follow the same rules - Republican campaign signs were tolerated, while Democratic signs were not. Rules said no campaign signs.
Are some sign-posters more equal than other sign-posters??
Not a place I'd ever want to live, or even spend much time. Acres of golf courses don't do it for me, although they are pleasant to look at and at least, are green (thanks to chemicals, of course).
^
That may very well be actionable. The HOA CAN have rules about signs (political or otherwise.) However there may be precedent that they have to enforce them equally on all residents.
But, in order to challenge the HOA on that basis, the homeowner would have to sue them in civil court. This is not a cheap nor quick process. If it's just the HOA, they may or may not want a fight. But if the homeowner is really going up against a deep pocketed, politically motivated developer, they may be into a long (several year) and expensive (six figure, maybe multiple) fight.
I'm sorry... You'd be a GD idiot to want to live there. Politically friendly to one party or not...
Monthly rate of $1066... On top of the mortgage for a cookie cutter house in there...
$1066. Per. Month. There's a sucker born every minute. Oh wait a second it's 55+ never mind. Baby boomers think that's a deal compared to what it costs to live in the tax burdened north east.
Can mortgage a nice house else where for what those HOA fees are, down here in Florida. Whatever floats your tuna boat...
Its a nice area there but ridiculously overpriced to live in those homes (many of which are little rinky dink with no space). Its much nicer to live in the Keys somewhere or even Port Isabel/South Padre Island South Texas
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
