The Morning Roar: Seattle to Cap Lyft & Uber, Rutherford Defends "Off the Grid" Woman, and a Gay Couple Sues to Force Church to Hold Wedding
Welcome to another edition of The Morning Roar, which you can find every Monday-Friday morning here at Lions of Liberty! Today, we look at a few stories around the country that are grinding my liberty gears.Seattle to Cap Lyft & UberThe Seattle City Council - which includes an avowed socialist - has voted to place limits on the number of drivers that app-based transportation companies such as Uber, Lyft and Sidecar can have operating at any one time. The Washington Post reports:
The new law would limit three companies — Uber, Lyft and Sidecar — to 150 drivers each on the road at any given time, for a collective total of 450 drivers. That’s a significant decrease from the 2,000 drivers the three companies estimate they have operating in the city right now.Taxi cab operators have said the new services have added so many drivers to city streets that it’s put them at a significant disadvantage. Seattle has not issued a new taxi license since 1990, when the city council passed a moratorium. The new legislation would issue an additional 200 taxi licenses over the next two years to the 688 traditional cabs already in operation.
A "significant disadvantage", the cab drivers cry! Of course, this "significant disadvantage" to which they refer is merely competition from these innovative new services, and the hungrier (and from my experience, often much more pleasant) drivers. Crony taxi companies rightly feel threatened by these new services, and look to the force of government to artificially skew the market back in their favor.The market is clearly choosing these convenient ride services over the dinosaurs of the taxi system, but the Taxi Beast will not go away quietly, and will look to utilize political force to stay alive.Rutherford Institute Defends "Off the Grid" Florida HoweownersThe Rutheford Institute has come to the defense of a Florida woman, Robin Speronis, who is charged with violating city code provisions due to her refusal to hook her house up to the the water, electrical, and sewer outlets run by the city. As Robin would find out, when you don't play by the rules, even if you are harming no one in doing so, government tends to get a bit snippy about things. In this case, Robin is facing fines of $50 per day.From John Whitehead, head of the Rutherford Institute (and past Lions of Liberty Podcast guest!) :
What happened to Robin Speronis should never have happened, and yet it is happening every day, to more and more Americans. Indeed, cases such as Robin’s are becoming increasingly common as overzealous government officials routinely enforce laws that penalize Americans for living off the grid, hosting a Bible study in one’s backyard, growing organic vegetables in one’s front yard, feeding wild animals, and collecting rainwater, to name just a few. Unfortunately, this disregard for private property by government officials brings us full circle, back to that pre-Revolutionary era when colonists had few to no rights whatsoever within their homes.
In a private property society, people would be free to acquire electricity in whatever manner they see fit short of theft or fraud, and many likely would choose to opt-in to some sort of "grid" system. Others would choose to live like Robin Speronis, and use solar panels and a camping stove. It's certainly not a lifestyle for everyone; but it's also her prerogative.Until a day comes when we live in a society that more greatly respects private property, luckily we have people like John Whitehead and the fine folks at the Rutherford Institute getting their hands dirty and defending people whose individual rights are being trampled upon.John Whitead on the Lions of Liberty Podcast:Gay Couple Sues to Force a Church to Hold Their WeddingIt's not just the U.S. that sees heated debates over whom should marry whom and who should be forced to participate in said rituals regardless of whether they agree with the basis of the marriage. In Great Britain, a gay couple is suing a church that refuses to administer their marriage due to the fact that they are a same-sex couple.Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, explains why he along with his partner Tony are suing the St. John the Baptist Church:
It is a shame that we are forced to take Christians into a court to get them to recognize us. It upsets me because I want it so much—a big lavish ceremony, the whole works. I just don’t think it is going to happen straight away. While same-sex marriage is now legal in the U.K. after a bill cleared Parliament earlier this year, the legislation still protects the right of churches to opt out of performing gay weddings, specifically the Church of England.
It's an ironic choice of words that Drewitt-Barlow uses when he says , "its a shame we are forced to take Christians into a court". It is this couple that is attempting to use the force of the State in order to get a church which they voluntarily attend to recognize their marriage.It's understandable that one would be frustrated to not have their relationship recognized by the church they attend. The Drewitt-Barlows attend the St. John the Baptist Church voluntarily. Any disagreements with the church's religious policy should likewise be dealt with through voluntary means, up to and including severing ties with that church. To attempt to influence the policy of this private organization by means of state coercion is to go against the very concept of free association; indeed, likely against many of the lessons the couple have heard inside of that church.Read The Morning Roar every weekday Monday-Friday!The Lions of Liberty are on Twitter, Facebook & Google+Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!
