That's exactly the problem. 33's posted ample evidence for his argument, Straw Man simply disagrees and he's not bright enough to distinguish the difference.
Move on with the next point already.
I have not been presented with anything that supports the "Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."
Think about when this was written. Property was owned by a tiny fraction of the population.
They were talking about abolition of private ownership of property.
They weren't talking about property tax, eminent domain, zoing laws, lawn maintenance or parking your camper in the back yard etc... They were talking about abolition of private ownership of real property (land)
All I've been presented with are pathetically weak arguments and then bitching and moaning that I won't accept them