Quote:
I would humbly like to suggest that we all get out a history book, any history books, American, European, whatever, and look at the examples from the founding of democracies. In very few cases did they observe the established order until they could change it.
I actually had language like that in my earlier post but removed it. Our democratic republic was predicated on a refusal to obey repugnant laws.
Personal liberty + personal responsibility, folks.
In more cynical moments I'd say that anti-chicken laws are less about health/welfare of the citizens and more about local govts responding to anything they perceive as an attack on property values (and therefore their tax rolls, and therefore their institutional power).
[btw, I have no personal axe to grind here; chickens are legal in my city. Just standing up for the principle.]
Of course our founding fathers first tried to work within the framework of English law. And it didn't work...and more and more of what they bnelieved were their rights as English citizens were taken away from them because they lived in America, not in England. They were not actually asking for any rights over and above those that the common English citizen living in England enjoyed, but parliament kept taking away American liberties one by one. And when they determined that they could not work within the system, THAT is when they rebeled.
This post sounds like it just to get ppl riled up.... Live and let live, I say. I don't understand a lot of things.... I wouldn't put up a post that stated that I didn't understand why ppl rob banks or steal children etc.... What is the motivation behind this post.... Ppl do dumb things... Yep all of us.... It is legal for me to have chickens by the way....I am just seriously wondering about what drives you to post this??? (the authors mood is kindly and smiley, yet curious)....
I personally would not intentionally break the law, although I have not researched the law, I have researched larger neighboring city laws that do allow chickens. My hope
is that I can provide a home for my hens that will not bother or offend my neighbors in any way. If I can do this for an extended period of time, then maybe I have firmer ground to stand on should there be a problem in the future. I'm also planning on sharing eggs with my next door neighbors in hopes of keeping peace.
Well, I personally am finding it an interesting discussion, and there are a lot of posts about "it's illegal, but I'm going to do it anyways and hope I don't get caught" followed by posts about the travesty and pain of having to get rid of pets because they were discovered and cited.
If you really feel it should be legal, then by all means, WORK TO MAKE IT LEGAL. If you just feel you should be an exception to the rule, then I don't have a lot of sympathy (and by the way, variances are a legal means of addressing exceptions to the rules). I do have a great deal of sympathy for folks that try to be legal, and are later told that they are not. I do not have much sympathy for city employees who haven't got a clue about the ordinances they manage. The city clerk should have a good idea of what all the ordinances entail, or be able to direct one to exactly the correct department or person who has that answer. And any of these city workers should be very well versed on the ordinances they work closely with and be able to cite the reference when asked.
Quote:
I will have to agree with you about the post. I don't really see where this is going?? I guess I'm a rebel. I have 3 hens in my backyard and we aren't allowed to have poultry in our neighborhood. Oh No, someone come arrest me! lol...My neighbors know we have chickens and love them. They can't wait to get fresh eggs from us!
In my opinion, there are far worse in this world today to worry about than a few pet chickens.
I appreciate this healthy debate and I think both sides bring a good argument to the table. I think alot of this is how you interpret the fairness of the laws. I do not condone breaking the law and try to abide by all the laws. That said some laws are outdated or unfairly favorable towards a certain portion of the population.
What if most the people in a town do not like cats and passed a law banning them. Besides being a pet their only real function is rodent control and one could argue that their waste is too pungent and hazardous, plus their waste is not a good fertilizer. Would people still have cats? I think so. Would they be breaking the law? Absolutely.
Also, there are many laws on the books that are no longer enforced, why aren't those laws being enforced and why aren't people abiding by them. Probably because they are outdated. In Riverside, CA it is against the law to kiss someone without first wiping your lips with rose petals. Why do all those people keep breaking the law?
I think it is safe to say that many of us will have to agree to disagree but that we can agree we love having chickens as pets. I see my chickens as a part of my past that I keep with me in the present, therefore they are a part of my humanity and who I am.