FREE SPEECH, FREEDOM of the PRESS

Since blogging is becoming such a vital part of the media and a source of information, I thought I better do some checking. Since this is not on paper, it must be considered free speech, since it is in print, better consider the definition of freedom of the press. The real issue, here, seems to be one of concern. Now, I realize this is not a famous blogsite, and I am not a blogger of prestige, but . . . once I hit the Publish button, it's out there. Just where "out there" is, I don't know, but I have said it, and typed it, and am accountable for the content. It bothers me, that so many things are being explained and "defined" in a way, that is so unrecognizable and foreign to my previous understanding. Why do I have to be concerned whether my right to free speech and freedom of the press might be termed subversive? How did we come to accept watching our every word in fear of repercussion when we live in a free society? When did that change occur? My husband and I both have mothers that are reminding us, not to say things and don't disagree with the powers that be. They can make life more difficult. So, maybe it's always been this way, but I remember being an adult in midwest America and being free enough to express myself without fear of losing my property. I began to realize our city was on a "mission," but by the time I realized it, it was obviously too late, and I had been on all sorts of community committees. And now, I know, what had seemed like progress has resulted in what now seems like occupation. Not only has our city overtaken it's citizens, we volunteered the hours to help them do it! And when I call city hall with a question, I have already been told, next summer's agenda is going to be even tougher on ordinances, so ultimately on it's residents. So, now that I know, you can't call city hall to complain or question, you may however call, to ask for leniency and more time. That's where it really starts to feel like occupation. We even have been told that in certain instances when proper protocol and decorum are observed; our city manager may forgive a lien. I do not have words to describe the sinking feeling inside, and to know I live in America. Our town has raised Code Inforcement to an intimidating level. And, I did ask a city employee the difference between ordinance and law. She very clearly and concisely told me there was none. I had asked last summer about these imposed fines and bills which resulted in leins against the properties, all done with no day in court. A different city employee told me they were not required to serve a summons, it was more efficient to do things the way they do them, but he understood our disdain. He said if he wasn't a city employee, he'd be pretty upset, too. And here is the kicker, I actually had a city inspector, who is also the son of a councilman, so we know, he is well informed, as well as connected; explain to me that all ordinances must be treated with the same rigorous intensity, whether it is a major safety issue or small annoyance. On a scale of 1 to 10, they are treated the same. And we have a mayor that calls himself a progressive leader that wants aggressive growth for our city! Well, with all due respect, the only word I can argue with in that sentence is his use of the word "our." I would be happy to sell him my property, and give him my portion of the town's real estate, but then why should city administrators negotiate or concern themselves with fair market value when they can simply hold a lien on the property, take by imminent domain, or annexation?
But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore G~d is not ashamed to be called their G~d: for He hath prepared for them a city