Abortions

In the First Congress, the committee proposal read, “no religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed.” Tami will protect this declaration; and she will caution those that want to use religious beliefs to repeal or ratify Constitutional statues, thereby depriving others of “equal rights of conscience.” E. Meese III: 303

Tami defends the Constitution and “equal rights of conscience”, therefore she supports a person’s right to not have an abortion and she supports a person’s right to have an abortion. Roe v. Wade regulated abortion rights based on the trimester principle, thereby granting a person the right to terminate a fetus before brain and respiratory systems develop. That decision was scientific and medical; where opposition to abortions has been religious. Tami supports the Supreme Court decision on Constitutional terms and believes a woman has the right to choose during the acceptably-defined period.

Furthermore, living wills and advance directives have utilized science to establish the medical determinants for death. Tami believes individuals should have the right to use their own moral, religious and financial nature, when determining end-of-life care. Conversely, medical advancements have also allowed those who suffer from emphysema and similar conditions the option of utilizing portable oxygen devices. Neither, situation has provoked religious activism; however, the Bible has no provision for oxygen, life support, or incubators. Posted on 9/5/11

The USA Party collective leadership has abortions now legalized out to 25 weeks. A crisis!!

Views on homosexuality

Homosexuality was defined as a religious sin; therefore we can look to the Constitution to determine a precedent. Amendment I stated, Congress, shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion; and the First Congress, stated “nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed.”

Tami supposes that Americans now recognize, opposition to gay rights has been religious in nature, thus unconstitutional.

Conversely, Tami continues to be disappointed with gay rights activism, which defines a homosexual person different then a heterosexual person. She does not support gay rights legislation; she supports an approach that protects the right of an individual; who may be heterosexual or homosexual. The Constitution stated, Americans have the right to liberty and the Supreme Court defined liberty as:

“the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.”

Tami reasons, individuals have the right to marry, and the licensing of marriages remains with the States. 

Posted on 9/5/11

Establishment Clause - Church retains its right to set membership and whom they marry in their faith irrespective of sex/gender. Person retains their conscious choice to choose where to marry based on membership requirements and thier religious beliefs.

Freedom of Speech and the Press 

Posted on 9/5/11

Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; 

Today, we have 24-hour news and entertainment shaping and forming World perspectives and actions, they have the power to effect individuals, corporations, and countries, in the most negative or positive manner. Many or most of these Global News Organizations have become similar, even though they have unique ownership. Tami has become concerned with their similarity, because the likeness of coverage creates a form of power, giving an illusion of correctness and generalizability. Furthermore, the globalization of media; has permitted many to operate without checks or restraints.

Tami believes World Peace and advancement depends on reliable, accurate, and defendable information, a condition which should be admired. During the 1700’s and since, propaganda was distributed through print in a slow and methodical manner. Since, then we have witnessed a Holocaust, Hiroshima, Rwanda Genocide, Srebrenica Massacre, Iraq War and recently we have seen social technologies affect Middle East peace. Print, radio, television and social technologies can have a devastating effect on Local and World events; however, Tami recognizes, the tools themselves, do little harm, it’s the words which form the content; the status of the person delivering the message and their power to influence; the reputation of the network; the distribution and repetitiveness of the message; the state of a country; and the impact the message has on World Leaders.

International cable, internet and satellite networks must be regulated and individuals, corporations and governments shall be protected from those that abuse their power. Tami would like the legacy principles of copyright protection, intellectual property, authorization, defamation, and consent incorporated into cable, internet and satellite networks.

The following quotes from Supreme Court rulings establish a precedent where Local and State authorities have the right to protect the public good; however it must be uniform and reasonable. Tami believes these principles should be incorporated into internet and media legislation. 

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was not designed to interfere with the exercise of the police power by the State for the protection of health, the prevention of fraud, and the preservation of the public morals.

In Crowley v. Christensen, the Supreme Court said: 

It is undoubtedly true that it is the right of every citizen of the United States to pursue any lawful trade or business, under such restrictions as are imposed upon all persons of the same age, sex, and condition. But the possession and enjoyment of all rights are subject to such reasonable conditions as may be deemed by the governing authority of the country essential to the safety, health, peace, good order, and morals of the community. Even liberty itself, the greatest of all rights, is not unrestricted license to act according to one's own will. It is only freedom from restraint under conditions essential to be equal enjoyment of the same right by others. (1890)