Perpetuating False-Facts to Further Religion-Based Legislation.
Consumer Products, Commercial Speech, and for War.
Where readily knowable variations and errors in translations
can lead to multiple doctrinal conclusions,
use of such texts shall include a disclaimer of absolutism.
Other Defendants may be named in coming weeks. At issue is whether absolutist doctrinal positions shall be led gently down the drain, where it is readily demonstrable that the texts on which they rely are erroneous in translation, skewed in interpretation, or cherry-picked out of all recognition of the context. Or shall they be left to circle us, ad infinitum, despite flawed grounding.
False Facts Perpetuation
The Complaint alleges, inter alia,
1. That source-accurate translations and transliterations of old texts are indeed within the reach of any fingers and keyboard, see, e.g. as to Genesis, http://www.mechanical-translation.org/ebook.htm/
and that Defendants knew or should have known that their statements of absolute and immutable Biblical Purpose and Religious Definitions, such as "Marriage," are readily debunkable as false-facts.
- Update 8/2013, looking back. Reference is made to the issue of Unintelligent Design, New York Times Magazine article by Jim Holt 2005 at p.15ff, wherein the design itself is examined in order to draw tentative conclusions about the designer. Enter the sloppy, the bizarre, the penchant for abortion where 1/3 of fertilized entities result in a live birth, translations showing that creation was designated functional, and not "good", there are virtually no economies, the deity-deities seeding the earth then absconding to let it be, perhaps. See Mechanical Translation of the Hebrew Bible, free download.
2. That such false-facts, such as attributing "good" and "moral" to creation rather than merely functional, are cultural accretions rather than divine inspiration; and a tool of control over the autonomous thought process of ordinary people wherein money is to be made and power entrenched.
- Although any law may stand as a cultural matter (even though couched in religious terms) if rational in purpose, and compelling or subject to balance of interests if it limits personal choice. Such laws cannot stand if based primarily on one's chosen interpretation of a religious text or self-told version. One person cannot force belief on another; Time to open the dogma-wall windows.
3. That an individual sect's conclusions, to ground legislation of a moral, behavioral preference nature, are defined as false-facts unless demonstrable beyond a reasonable doubt, and such false-facts such shall not be spread as Absolute Requirements for anyone choosing another path.
4. That secular consumers may remain subject to commercial puffing in the market, for the nonce, but religious people are not to be reduced any longer to the status of mere consumer. Religious consumers demonstrably start with the commitment to believe no matter what, and from there, will readily follow wherever, with firm emotion, not ongoing analysis. Secular consumers, however, are not subject to the same degree of brand loyalty. See priest, the Rev. Helmut Schuller, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/23/world/europe/with-new-pope-spotlight-returns-to-mild-rebel-priest.html?_r=0
Relief includes, upon a finding of False-Fact Perpetuation, Gross Negligence
1. All legislation based substantially on such False-Fact Perpetuation shall be void; and a conclusive presumption shall attach to any new legislation that bases moral behavior (behavior not taking place outside one's own fingertip span) on any group's religious views or definitions; such rebuttable presumption being that the proposal is based on False-Fact Perpetuation;
2. Institutions perpetuating False-Facts, here the organizations, institutions named as NOM and VAT so far, and others who may be added, shall disclose their assets wherever located and real owner-in-interest shall prevail over title flipping; and such shall be frozen with clawbacks to date of service of the suit implemented, with reparations and other damages awarded and paid as may be equitable to protect the innocent; in case of future suits regarding calls to war, damages to the nation shall be paid from those who profited financially from the war;
3. Individuals formerly members of such False-Fact institutions or organizations, or parties, may leave at will, including children coming of age, without obstruction, or loss of property or dignity.
4. Rights of children still minors to be free of false-fact perpetuation shall remain under discussion and not addressed in this suit. Texas in particular seeks to present false-facts in texts, and that issue shall be addressed later, if desired. See Curriculum summary of activities, Texas
- It shall be a defense of the institution-organization acknowledges publicly, while continuing to adhere to the false-fact as essential to its views, that the false-fact promulgated is not provable, and thus is to be absorbed only upon choice, as a cultural cohesion matter, and subject to later fact analysis. Despite litmus tests, the Believer shall be free to consider himself or herself a member of the group, but not necessarily subject to the full fact deals formerly involved.
Persons of any age, seeking to be free of personal choice-obstructing moral behavior laws based on religious grounds, may file a preservation of action suit such that no statute of limitations shall affect a later claim, subject to a cap of 10 years after majority. This may include preservation of suits against educational systems where False-Fact Perpetuations are fed daily to children through strained text books and filtered history. Did humans coexist with big dinosaurs? To defend against false-fact suit, the institution must acknowledge overtly that science says no, but religion for its own purposes can say anything without accountability, so take your choice.
A rebuttable presumption shall arise that a child retains a right to autonomy despite minority status. Where a child objects to imposition of belief, that child's rights to autonomy of thought are not totally subject to the parents' views, details in the works.
5. Failure to name any party as Defendant to this suit shall not bar later suits; that is, there shall be no compulsive joinder in this initial action. That means that George Bush and his organization, the WC, Whitehouse Cohorts, in setting forth False-Fact Perpetuations about the need for war; and other State perpetuations.
Similarly other Church perpetuations as to God's Plan, what it is if it is, and who says, and is He at Home and where, may also be subject to suit in future.
6. This legislation shall be deemed to conform to freedoms of the First and any other Amendments, as reasonable regulation of time, place, and manner of speech. The manner of speech being regulated here is to fib or not to fib, in order to achieve gain at the expense of others.
See FN 1, Memorandum of Law
Such memorandum notes, for this limited purpose (comprehensive briefs are in process),
- that ongoing disagreements through the ages challenge the gravitas of declared dogma, and including as to DOMA in particular, that
- Jerome erred in substituting "wife" for the word "woman" in Genesis, there being no marriage in Genesis, just men and women, then men buying or taking and using women in a later patriarchal construct; and
- As to miscellany, it looks from "kenegdo" or "kngdu or K NGD V (search) followed by gradual diminution in rights for her, poor dear. God's plan? Paul wasn't even there. He was chosen for a conversion, but not to ground an entire church, for heaven's sakes. What happened to Peter, who was? And brother James' ideas that went East after his death? Ask Paul. Hardly knowable from texts, and certainly not agreed in the theological community. Take off your hats, ladies. Speak up.
* Merely negligent False-Fact Perpetuation, where the allegation was corrected as soon as the ambiguity or false-fact root was disclosed and was not discoverable earlier, shall be subject to recant, correction in the same manner as the perpetuation was perpetuated, and damages making whole those whose decisions were unlawfully restricted.