Tuesday, May 10, 2011

ABORTION. ABCD - Activity Behind Closed Doors Protection Act. Reproductive Decisions Privacy Act.

.
ABCD - Activities Behind Closed Doors
Protection Act 
.
Reproductive Decisions Privacy Act
.
WHEREAS, some states and other governmental entities have enacted or are considering personal morality legislation affecting family and reproductive planning, see Reuters, and sample regular person comment Reality Check, South Dakota Banning Abortion Without Banning Abortion, 5/8/2011, and LA Times, National Abortion Legislation, 5/8/2011; and issues of sexual relationships and marriage: About: Marriage, Same Sex; and

WHEREAS, issues of the bed were left for 1500 years to the woman, and also for her to assume her own consequences; and the change to a ban is recent and unjustified as related to "salvation" but more to marketing, see http://italyroadways.blogspot.com/#!/2012/02/salvation-or-marketing-religions.html; and
.
WHEREAS, the concept of limiting abortion rights, without specific findings or scientific evidence supporting a compelling governmental interest, has spread to DC, see House Votes to Limit Access to Abortion, NYT, Abortion
.
WHEREAS, these proposed or actual laws primarily further personal or particular ethnic group cultural or religious goals: by regulating constitutional privacy interests, and without demonstrating in the legislation the compelling state interest as to each regulation step, through great weight given to scientific evidence and not morality opinions or other personal view touting (erroneous legislation or facial flaws that cannot be remedied by cosmetics); and
,
WHEREAS, appeals and repeals of enacted matters are tax-money wasting, and time-wasting, for legislation that on its face reasonably cannot pass the strict scrutiny test required for legislation regulating constitutionally protected activities, see an everyman's legal dictionary, The Free Dictionary, Legal Dictionary, State Interest;
.
THEREFORE
.
1. Legislation must include its findings and evidence, giving great weight to science, sufficient to enable filing for declaratory judgments prior to enactment.
.
2. Any state or other governnment entity that passes or proposes legislation that regulates Activities Behind Closed Doors (herein ABCD): by prohibition, or by time, place, and manner restriction; and without demonstrating in the legislation itself, or in its detailed legislative history, clear and convincing findings as to each requirement, shall pay deterrent and restitution amounts as set forth herein.  The findings and evidence from scientific and not merely opinion sources are needed in order to pass the strict scrutiny review test of the courts, and shall require that great weight given to scientific evidence and scientific expert opinion.
.
Such evidence and expert opinion shall be applied directly to issues of a reasonable balance of interests on a spectrum from no intervention to prohibition, based on science and policy based on such. "Sanctity" and saving "human" life, so long as there is war and poverty adversely affecting human life, shall not be raised as a policy matter in the abortion spectrum.
.
3. Violators of the requirement to set forth clear and convincing evidence of the need for the restriction so as to establish compelling state interest, shall include the legislators voting for such legislation: personal liability.   Such shall pay as incurred
.
a)  the counsel fees and costs, all out of pocket expenses reasonably incurred, lost wages and salary, for seeking protection of ABCD activities legislated erroneously, and

b) a liquidated damages amount to any individual whose privacy has been erroneously legislated against, in the amount of
  • an annuity of at least $10,000 per year tax-free for as many years as s/he is old, or 
  • an amount representing 50 percent of each legislator's salary who voted for the legislation to be paid in one tax-free lump sum; 
  • whichever calculation is greater. This liquidated damages amount is deemed to be necessary as a preventive against further erroneous legislation geared to one group's religious and not state goals in a plural society.
4.  Any legislator approving or voting to pass such legislation regulating ABCD shall also be required to attend a course in civics, which course shall be given at one state location open one day a week, and shall require three days to complete; and view a video on botched abortions, attend court hearings in domestic and child abuse, and, if religious ground is set forth to justify the restriction, examine Bibles including transliterations, for usage of the word "abortion" or use of the word "kill" or "murder" as to any in utero situation, see No Old Testament Abortion Prohibition or Regulation, and No New Testament Abortion Prohibition or Restriction

5.  A declaratory judgment holding that the legislation as drafted indeed meets the clear and convincing evidence test as to compelling state interest shall be a total defense to the deterrent and restitution matters herein.

6. Any state or other governmental body considering such legislation shall provide a copy six days, representing six days shalt thou labor, prior to vote; to the public online and by all other media; and shall, upon request of any registered voter, submit it for such declaratory judgment prior to passage.  These declaratory and deterrent measures shall be deemed reasonably related as a reasonable deterrent to wayward legislation.

7.  As to any compulsory tenancy in utero, the provisions for child support beginning at conception shall apply, see Child Support for Zygotes, Foeti, Morula
................................................

Legislative notes:

The committee notes that so far there is found no cannon fodder for religious origins of any abortion rights issue because the canon wisely left it alone. See Early Christian Writings on Abortion: Issue omitted from canon. The Committee also found no compelling societal-impact problem with how individual women were handling it, no threat to population sustenance, and if she burns for her decision, so be it, MYOB, no grounds were found for authority to vigilantism, to enforce one's own morality upon another.

The Committee also looked back at Sundays, and found these activities to be acceptable and traditional: Preach and example; no force. Tha tha tha that's all folks.   And after the canon, big church institutions waffled all over the map on it and doctrine is suspect and untrustworthy when it cannot relate directly to what the Founder, the Main One, said or did or stood for.

As balance for all religious concepts, companion legislation is being considered as shown at the lower right, a matter of equal intrusion into consequences for activities behind closed doors and elsewhere.









No comments: