I can sympathize with the sentiments expressed here. In doing some reflection following the death of my MIL 2 weeks ago, and all the squabbling among sibblings regarding the estate and who "owns" what, I have sorta been thinking about the materialism we get so wrapped up in, in our culture. This is not a criticism of any TBN member, but only some ponderings that came to mind after seeing my wife's sisters and nieces at war over who now "owns" what.
From a purely legal/technical point of view, there is no such thing as complete and total ownership of land. Instead, individuals, groups, entities own a specified set of rights in regards to a parcel of land. Those rights usually entail at least a minimum of restrictions: one can't establish a business in most residentially zoned areas. One can't open his own private toxic waste dump, munitions factory, or nuclear power plant on the land just because he "owns" it (unless he is rich enough to buy off the authorities). There are environmental and archaeological restrictions on some parcels: my neighbor owns property with protected vernal pools and extremely rare native grasses and organisms in them. Almost all native grasses and organisms living in these pools have been displaced by European varieties. He knew about all this before he bought, but he still feels, "It's my land and I ought to be able to do whatever the H*** I want to on it, no matter what that is." Now this guy is my friend, but we don't agree on this. Not too far away from here, people are having to abandon their wells because of waste dumps and WWII munitions factories that put hundreds of thousands of tons of toxins in the ground. The stuff is spreading through the aquifers because of the recklessness of others on "their" property. A small store a half mile away had its underground gasoline tank rupture and that NTBE stuff is now spreading toward my well.
It strikes me as ironic that many have no interest in protecting wilderness from logging and drilling, yet when a company that owns the mineral rights below them shows up to excercise its set of property rights, those who own the rights to have a house above it become unhappy. It also seems ironic that a Supreme Court considered so "conservative" ruled that a town has the right of eminant domain to an extent that well to do neighborhoods can be bulldozed for a new shopping center that will bring more sales tax to the city council. That seemed like the most non-conservative thing I could ever dream of. I guess the government is the government, is the government, no matter what party is in charge. Even personal property comes with limited sets of rights. The cops can take things as evidence, even though the owner isn't involved. The feds took the McGrudder (sp?) film of JFK's assassination and only gave a small amount to the family as compensation just a couple of years ago.
My dog thinks he owns our parcel of land, and he lets all visitors know that loudly. The bees on the side of my house surely believe they own it, and we sometimes wage war with each other over that issue. The land was here for billions of years before humans ever came along. I don't know who owned it then. I guess the dinosaurs did until that big meteor came along. I am a steward of the land for a brief time. The pharohs were wrong, dead wrong; you can't take your "posessions" with you, hard as you may try. If the land were "mine" in absolute terms, my ownership would last forever and I could take it with me into the afterlife. But such as it is, the land will see countless "owners" after me, and humans shall have passed from existence long before the land is reclaimed by the sun when it goes nova in another 4.5 billion years.
Hope I didn't offend anyone and sorry to be somewhat off topic. All this family squabbling over what's "mine" is just making me sorta do some thinking. Funny that all the squabbling is among females, and some of the logic some of them employ is just beyond my ability to follow. I'm going out to the back 40 now to peacefully (I hope) watch the sun set on "my land".
