Wherefore we acknowledge that America may be considered a secular country without a foundation in religious or, “life-affirming” beliefs, we the people of this sovereign land declare that reform is in order.

We the people do not desire to diminish the number or value of beliefs a person may choose to hold at various times of their life, but insofar as holding certain beliefs increases the likelihood of acting in a way that leads to harm, whether to oneself (without just cause), to another person, or to the nucleus of a functioning society, namely the family, such beliefs are deemed of lesser value, resulting in certain consequences towards holding public office for those who hold those beliefs.

Because it has been firmly established that when harm to oneself, another person or the nucleus of society occurs, it occurs through those who…

  1. hold no religious or life-affirming beliefs,
  2. hold religious beliefs considered of lesser value in protecting the basic rights of all citizens,
  3. are ignorant or indifferent towards certain truth,
  4. have diminished capacity for enacting behavior consistent with those beliefs considered of superior value, whether through illness, the use of chemical, mind-altering substances, or through some other means that limits or prevents sound judgment and self-control,
  5. are excessively self-centered, prone to procrastinate and / or are apathetic / indifferent

…it has also been firmly established that government should rightfully fall into the hands of those who, as a result of embracing those beliefs that uphold the intrinsic dignity and rights of all human beings, act in the best interest of all.

Insofar as all human beings are prone to put their needs before the needs of others, no government, to whatever extent established by those who best embrace beliefs that uphold human dignity and God-given rights to life, liberty and property, is beyond the need for reform when such leaders have demonstrated unethical and / or immoral behavior.  Similarly, no human being, no matter how firmly they declare to uphold those beliefs that are considered of superior value, is beyond reproach.  Additionally, although a human being may fail miserably at upholding those practices and virtues associated with those beliefs held to be superior, it is not the beliefs themselves that are necessarily at fault.

Insofar as a true democracy is subject to whatever forms of ignorance are predominate in the majority, we declare it a priority to educate all those who are unaware or would deny facts surrounding the intrinsic dignity of all human beings.  Accordingly, such education would result in a democracy that would naturally elect better leaders for all of its citizens.

However, insofar as this education has not or cannot be achieved, we declare the need for ascension to a form of government ruled by a republic, where such public servants embrace and naturally uphold laws that allow for the protection of the dignity and rights of all human beings, from the moment of their conception to natural death.

We assert that a person is created and takes their earliest identifiable form at the moment of conception, the time at which a person has a full human genome, which includes the mitochondrial DNA, i.e. the Eve gene.

Although such a person would be incapable of demonstrating their personhood at this early stage of development, beyond possessing a full human genome and continuing to grow, such a person shall receive full protection of their rights under law, in particular, the right to life, to continue growing.

There are many beliefs that are life-affirming, that reflect the sacredness of life, and in particular, of human life.  Some hold this belief without necessarily believing in a higher power or God.  For many however, this truth is affirmed in the knowledge that every person is made in the image of God and therefore, has infinite worth.  Whatever the case, those who would affirm that life is sacred and that every human person has a right to life, would be fit for public service.

In contrast, those who do not believe that every human person from the moment of their conception has a right to life, that human life is sacred, are deemed unfit for holding public office, whether or not they are agnostic or would deny the existence of a God who has made mankind in His image.

This reform is in order because it is believed that those who do not believe in the sanctity of human life or the right to life of every human person, from the moment of their conception, would not uphold the dignity of every human person by upholding legislation that protects those who cannot protect themselves, thus exemplifying that they are unfit to serve the public or act in the best interest of the public.

It is also here acknowledged that the continuance of socioeconomic programs such as Medicare and Social Security cannot be sustained without a growing work force.  Given our recent history since the widespread use of contraceptives, leading to more abortions, pornographic videos (including those involving children), and an overall weakening of traditional family life, and with respect to a failing Medicare and Social Security system, it is evident that there cannot be a functioning society without legal protection of the rights of all human beings from the moment of conception.

Eliminating the option to kill an unborn child through abortion (whether chemical or surgical, or through the use of those forms of birth control known to have high typical use-failure rates, often leading to abortion), aids in the development of a society that respects human life and family, the nucleus of civilization.