This was discussed here using a slightly different example, but virtually the same question.
Uh…okay, if you want to play that game, let’s ask the opposite question. “Why should the will of some people trump the right of others to live on their own property?” Hmm.
Why does that question sound so familiar.
And more importantly…People have a right to improved standards of living? And who exactly is obligated to provide that? Who decides what constitutes “improved”? How “improved” does it have to be before the obligation is met?