Dobbs. Amicus Brief. Law proposed. A Female Forced-Gestation Terrorism Act.

Dead hand control  Filers of a Dobbs v. Jackson amicus brief:  Support for banning protesters against government management of females. Here, Sicily.

I. And it came to pass that the privilege of men to manage women was firmly taken for granted, after years of slanted history and self-serving interpretation and translation of evidence from history and tradition (force).  Upon protest from time to time, the men declared that the upstartresses were not only flawed in seeking their own agency, but if successful, they may well interfere with the economic monopoly interests of men, opening doors to competition if women were free to be Selves with Souls. 

Particularly manipulated were earliest glyphs and glaughs, followed by solemn declarations of limited entitlement to vote, given to white propertied males in original Constitutions, such bestowal never to be changed, and if it were so changed, the results flowing therefrom (independence of both genders) could never alter the privilege of the propertied white male or his equivalent by Hook or by Crook, A-men.

II. Dobbs v. Jackson emerged from this morass and was so decided by the True Believers.  During the process, an amicus brief fell off the truck just as this reporter passed. Quick. To the presses.  

A. Issue. 

 

 Shall the status quo by history and tradition, by which the males set forth documents of the rights of men and excluding mention of women, forever fix those rights so as to preserve economic and managerial control of women (including whether they shall have a choice in whether to reproduce thee, churl, however objectionable thee be).

 

B. Rule of Law.  

 

 Dobbs v. Jackson. By history and tradition. there is no contest.  The male wins. Let merit be damned.  Let force prevail.   It shall be lawful to keep her barefoot and pregnant and at home in the role the man sets for her, supported by his selective translations and erring scribes, so she cannot challenge thy superiority and surpass thee in the economic artistic and philosophical life. And thee may live out thy delusion of superiority unhinged.

Force or merit?  Religious and political tracts are written by the victors, and supplemented by inquisitors and others imposing themselves.  The originalism of each proposal must be subject to strict scrutiny where liberties are at stake.

 

C. Facts.  

 

Protests arose from some, enjoying benefits of privilege and the right of control of females, upon the reversal of culturally inherited supremacy (Roe v. Wade). Other protests arose half a century later upon the reversal of the reversal, the Henley of the Law, with Dobbs v. Jackson.  

 

Meanwhile, another subject group of living creatures deemed inferior to anything human, the animals, were gathered up and subjected to Horrors Unmitigated and without transparency as to focused need,  monitoring for necessity and clear measures of results:  research for anything a grant would grant. 

 Protests arose as to conditions of the subjects, since these peasant-equivalents could not revolt on their own,  Protests included getting into animal farm factories and disseminating visual and auditory evidence of the need for a moral look -- alleviate pain and minimize death at the very least, and such cost to be a normal part of a shared creation, etc.  

 

Are there limits to rights to profit and non-interference with animals exploited for economic agenda, with minimal transparency and accountability. See the foundational article University of Michigan 2011,  2022 Michigan State University,   https://www.animallaw.info/article/brief-summary-state-animal-enterprise-interference-laws.  Herein, Michigan.

 

State Animal Enterprise Interference Laws.  Those are summarized.  Protesters against the protesters ran to the legislatures and passed mighty sums to get laws passed criminalizing those deemed animal rights terrorists, with penalties and fines and felonies, oh, my.  "You will not cost me money," ran the slogan. Acts of publicizing conditions of the subject living beings and freeing the caged ones were criminalized. 

 

Shall that framework now protect the supremacists from protest. 

 

D.  Argument

 

Envision the result if the protesters against subjugation of women to the reproductive desires of men were treated as criminals.  It is this framework passed into law by the protesters against the protesters re critters, that may well be used against those protesting management of women for fun and profit.  There be parallels.

The Anti-Protest Managed-Female Enterprise Act: 

State Female Management Enterprise Interference Laws.  

Transformative fair use,

Summary

State female forced-reproduction terrorism laws may legitimately be enacted to protect private and publicly funded means of female-control, including   

a). birth frequency enhancement, 

b). correlative product placement functions, and 

c) other operations for profit using females (female-management facility). 

Prohibited as criminal terrorism are protest activities:

a) Acts that obstruct, impede, or disrupt outside reproductive management of females, research, or related experimentation conducted at a facility that includes female-management.

WHEREFORE

1. A person who protests and so violates a state female forced-reproduction terrorism law, and by so doing promotes the self-determination of the female contrary to his history and tradition (that he used to exclude women before), may be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, and face a stiff fine and prison term, and may be required to pay restitution. 

2. It shall be deemed that opposing protest activity does not violate state or federal rights of speech, assembly, equal rights, etc.  Many states have already done it and they are still standing. "A Minnesota bill introduced in April 2011 seeks to make it a felony to disrupt operations at factory farms."

3. The law is justified by furthering legitimate state interests:  a) In government and individuals making money, b) in promoting monopoly of men in religious, political and economic and free-loader spheres, by keeping women barefoot and pregnant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barefoot_and_pregnant.

4. The law allows legislators to ignore other and substantial causes of low birth rates, other than stubborn women who do not want to reproduce you.  The legislators'  little swimmers are reduced in strength and number, wee y's and BIG X'S. See them run to congressional tanning salons at taxpayer expense in a flap. To focus on that cause of a reduced birth rate, and pros and cons of any efforts to change nature as to reproduction in any way, invades their privacy.  See https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/low-sperm-count/symptoms-causes/syc-2037458

4. Management of females is reasonable to promote public health and safety.  

 

Therefore, only a "rational basis" is needed to support it.   You think up something that supports that. 

5., Management of females while doing no management of males in a given context does not affect their rights to equal protection.

Therefore, "heightened scrutiny" is not needed to support it.  Look at all the rights she has. No, not the centuries it has taken, but what she has that she did not then:  https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2017-01-20/timeline-the-womens-rights-movement-in-the-us

The law definitively declares that she is equally protected, so there.  She is! She is! Stamp, stamp!  

She and he were, indeed, perhaps equally motivated to do the act, and so did it. 

However, that us step one.  Step two is the fertilization that may or may not result is not a matter of voluntary action. Yet she, although he was a necessary participant, is left saying, "Huh?" Her life is altered forever, he strolls off scot-free. Both knew the possible fertilized result and proceeded anyway, therefore equal responsibility for it.

That mutual responsibility, however interferes with Point 3. 

6. Elaborating on acts and intention:  

If the female rights terrorist acts where injury to other people or property damage result, and if the protester iintends to obstruct, impede, or disrupt operations, research, or experimentation as with non-treatment of medical emergency reproduction issues, or a very little girl, those are felonious or misdemeanors, depending on who has what connections and political contribution records.  

• For example, it would be a violation to enter a  business offering counseling, doing things, saying things, without being a bona fide managed female, without permission to videotape child and adult females in pain or danger to life and well-being and subject to behavior controls, or to free  persons detained and/or arrested for exercising self-determination and body integrity from their cages.

8. It is also prohibited to deter or prevent people from participating in a lawful activity, as defined herein, that involves the use of managed females.  For animals, thou shalt not report, or film, or record, the process of electrocuting billy goats. or other things, done to other animals without transparancy, oversight, and mitigation, https://www.peta.org.au/news/factory-farm-beagles/

• Some legislation deems it a gross misdemeanor to document an “image or sound” of suffering at a managed animal facility, punishing both videographers and distributors of such videos. Iowa and Florida have also considered such amendments, See Michigan.
  

10. The Constitution supports management of women because, by silence, it perpetuates it. The Constitution was written by white, propertied males and to lay out the rights of other white, propertied males. Quitcherbellyachin'.

11.  The Constitution supports the management of women because at the amendment of 1920 granting women he right to vote, it did not also say it had to enable it against protesters seeking to deter her or fund its enforcement.

12. Scopes of punishment: Look to the animal laws.

• Animal "In South Carolina, a misdemeanor act of animal terrorism can result in a fine as high as $10,000 and a prison sentence as long as three years."

• Animal. "In Pennsylvania, a person committing a felony act of animal terrorism faces a hefty fine of $100,000 and a prison sentence as long as 40 years. In a minority of jurisdictions, a crime involving an animal enterprise may be subject to a penalty enhancement. A perpetrator may also be ordered to pay restitution to the victim for damages."

13.  Forced gestation does not violate religious precepts absent full scholarly debate, and if it did, the person holding the belief can apply prohibitions to herself.  No room for protest.

 14. Snark. If the female suffers physical or psychological or financial negative consequences from the forced birth, she should have just said no originally.   No room for protest.

15.  The government and private persons by court order may snoop, stalk and otherwise cyberly identify women who protest compulsory births at

15. What? 

[Banners appear across the screen} 

• The female shall have the absolute right to say no, at any stage of the proceedings. 
• Criminal provision for assault shall apply to personal relationships.  
• The partner has equal financial responsibility for the reasonably anticipated consequence of a possible pregnancy, and shall pay child support to begin at conception and through majority defined as military age. 
• If she is held solely responsible, the names of all fathers shall be recorded at  town hall as grantors and the woman as grantee, to underscore her status as property.  
• The product of conception shall be defined as a citizen of the nation of the mother and the nation of the father, as well as the nation where the conception occurred. 
• Men lose the right to use enhancement pills and other procedures promoting fatherhood so long as women cannot use their pills and procedures to stop the presses
• .No purveyor of pharma or Dr or healer shall sell, give, facilitate the passing around or mailing of male enhancement pills to the degree that the pharma-DR is similarly hindered in prescribing birth or day after pills. Medical and over-the-counter records shall be released in such event and kept an available to the public as to gent-enhancement pill use to provide equal shaming, shunning, etc. .

Stop! Stop! We've been hacked!! Somebody turn off the banners across the screen!  

E.  Conclusion

Who or what decides. History and tradition fail as criteria, long skewed by force. Use common sense and conflicts of laws. The woman shall decide. She puts in 9 months, he put in less. 

Next?  Explore alternatives to the forced dogma. The religious would note that The Human was not born, but shapen from mud.  Even then, the shape was not a living soul until the Deity breathed on it, and the shape then breathed and was a human.  Eve had her first baby at her request, not by being put upon, and had birth control obviously -- so that she could wait until Son One was murdered by Son Two and then she did Seth. Ha. Runs to the blackboard and puts up a point. Go, originalism. 

And she was to be the KNGDV, guide, helper as the deity is a helper, same word, as in front of him, helper as the deity is Biblically, the superior one who provides assistance, and look how well he obeyed that intended sequence. Genesis 2:18. https://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen2.pdf

Adam's animosity toward his perceived competition, resenting her, not telling her important information about the Garden (which tree did you say? she asked, looking about, and he just stands back)) has a slogan:  I will not be replaced. Now, how if that is the original mindset, misogyny resulting in the drive to control her is the true original sin.

Misogyny: The real original sin, Or among the worst evils leading to global purging by the Flood,  Cathedral, Roskilde, Denmark

There is no way that the State or Federal government can do better than a person in moral decisions within herself. If she makes the wrong decision morally, some say she will burn.  Ok. Her risk.

We can acknowledge a gradually increasing governmental interest once we have a person, as measured by a developmental sequence enabling survival outside the womb and brain connectors for feeling pain and awareness, a matter of science, not sentiment: 

Watch definitions.  They change. 1 U.S. Code § 8 - “Person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual” as including born-alive infant.  And, with an eye to legislation, watch this one: (c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.

(Added Pub. L. 107–207, § 2(a), Aug. 5, 2002, 116 Stat. 926.)  Responsibility in all respects for children rests with both parents as to time expended, sacrifice of work, expense, caretaking, absent other agreement in writing and with each having counsel if desired, at mutual expense.

 ___________________________

We, the People