Among other things he didn't pay fees to graze his cattle.
Should Christians submit to unjust laws, by tangential logic? How about ex post facto laws, by another tangent?
If you believe a law is unjust then morally you are free to oppose it. But also be prepared to pay the penalty for your stand.
Bundy was not required to pay fees to graze his cattle. As I understand it, BLM charges for range management, at least in Nevada. 50% of the money received is to go to the state - and Bundy has paid this - and 50% is to go to “range betterment projects”, which Bundy says is not being done and he therefor refuses to pay.
From the Taylor Grazing Act:
Use of District Lands. The Secretary must permit free grazing of domestic livestock within districts. Nothing in the Act is intended to prevent the use of timber, stone, gravel, clay, coal and other deposits by miners, prospectors, settlers and residents. Further, the Act must not restrict: the acquisition, granting or use of permits or rights-of-way within grazing districts under laws existing before the adoption of the Act; ingress or egress over public lands in these districts; prospecting, locating, developing, mining, entering, leasing or patenting mineral resources of grazing districts under applicable law. § 315d and 315e.
Note that the Act must not restrict, among other things, “the use of permits or rights-of-way within grazing districts under laws existing before the adoption of the Act.” Nevada grazing law was in place long before the Taylor Grazing Act, and Bundy’s family had established their grazing easement (right-of-way) well before the Act.
The Founding Fathers would have loved to hear your attitude. The rule of force trumps the rule of law, then?
Proven false. Read more.