In Can State Expropriation of Minerals be Justified? Part I, I set out a common law property rights argument drawing from the writings of jurists Blackstone and Locke as well as contemporary philosopher Ed Feser. I looked at what circumstances, if any, might justify the state taking of real property, looking specifically at minerals from […]
Entries Tagged as 'Jurists'
Can State Expropriation of Minerals be Justified? Part II
March 9th, 2010 6 Comments
Tags: Case of Mines · Crown Minerals Act 1991 · Edward Feser · James Parcell · John Locke · Kevin Counsell · Lewis Evans · Neil Quigley · Property Rights · Rights and Freedoms · Sub-Soil Land Rights · Takings · William Blackstone
Can State Expropriation of Minerals be Justified? Part I
March 5th, 2010 22 Comments
New Zealand, like many nations, has a long history of the state taking real property, often without compensation. In this two part series I examine one sub-set of takings, minerals from the sub-soil of privately held property (although the argument herein could apply with equal force to any state taking). Drawing from common law, the […]
Tags: Crown Minerals Act 1991 · Edward Feser · John Locke · Property Rights · Rights and Freedoms · Sub-Soil Land Rights · Takings · William Blackstone
Property Rights: Blackstone, Locke and the Legislative Scheme Part II
February 19th, 2010 8 Comments
This two part series looks at the state of property rights under the current legislative scheme in New Zealand. Particularly I address attempts to suggest that the passage of Acts such as the Crown Minerals Act and the Resource Management Act have not significantly altered the common law concept of property rights and the claim […]
Tags: Crown Minerals Act 1991 · Property Rights · Resource Management Act 1991 · Rights and Freedoms · Sub-Soil Land Rights · William Blackstone
Property Rights: Blackstone, Locke and the Legislative Scheme Part I
February 17th, 2010 10 Comments
This two part series looks at the state of property rights under the current legislative scheme in New Zealand. Particularly I address attempts to suggest that the passage of Acts such as the Crown Minerals Act and the Resource Management Act have not significantly altered the common law concept of property rights and the claim […]
Tags: Crown Minerals Act 1991 · Edward Feser · John Locke · Property Rights · Resource Management Act 1991 · Rights and Freedoms · Sub-Soil Land Rights · William Blackstone
Name Suppression and the Balancing of Rights and Freedoms
December 22nd, 2009 4 Comments
God, via the consent of the governed, gives authority to the state to administer justice against those who violate the rights and freedoms of others. Given this, it is important that the citizens can see that justice is being done. My fellow blogger WhaleOil’s very public battle with New Zealand’s name suppression laws and the […]
Tags: Due Process · Name Suppression · Rights and Freedoms · Thomas J · Whale Oil
Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part VI
December 3rd, 2009 Comments Off on Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part VI
In my last posts, beginning Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part I, I set out the doctrine of religious restraint and critiqued some of the key arguments in support of it. I looked at the objection that the argument from respect is too thin, that applied consistently it excludes too much and Audi’s response to […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Freedom of Religion · Jurisprudence · Law Studies · Lydia McGrew · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Phillip Quinn · Philosophy of Religion · Political Philosophy · Public Policy · Religion in Public Life · Robert Audi · Stephen Carter · Terence Cuneo
Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part V
November 30th, 2009 1 Comment
In my last posts, beginning Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part I, I set out the doctrine of religious restraint and critiqued some of the key arguments in support of it. I looked at the objection that the argument from respect is too thin, that applied consistently it excludes too much and Audi’s response to […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Edward Feser · Freedom of Religion · Jurisprudence · Law Studies · Philosophy of Religion · Political Philosophy · Public Policy · Religion in Public Life · Terence Cuneo
A common objection to belief in the God of the Bible is that a good, kind, and loving deity would never command the wholesale slaughter of nations. In the tradition of his popular Is God a Moral Monster?, Paul Copan teams up with Matthew Flannagan to tackle some of the most confusing and uncomfortable passages of Scripture. Together they help the Christian and nonbeliever alike understand the biblical, theological, philosophical, and ethical implications of Old Testament warfare passages.
