Approximately 3500 unborn evictions are carried out in the U.S. every day. Each eviction sentence terminates human life without providing legal representation for those occupying the womb. Why do we continue to allow lawful protection for evicted occupants of a dwelling but dismiss as worthless our evicted tenants of the womb? Eviction standardization may be a process worthy of pursuing.
One of the many inconsistencies regarding liberalism is the Pro-Abortion defense describing the unborn as being fully dependent on the pregnant mother’s body. Liberals tend to adopt this defense in advocating for abortion rights especially when ownership of the unborn fails repeatedly to convince those cognizant and acute. This dependency although legitimate in theory fails to incorporate with it a level of humaneness. Compassion for the unborn hinders characteristics native to liberal ideologies from fully prospering. A factor long removed by progressives through relentless targeting and promotional adherence to the deterioration of society.
The mother characterized by abortion proponents is effectively and for the most part a host. An unattached entity distanced from the scars of emotional accountability. Her updated role is now defined by blasé provisioning of a controlled environment necessary in the developmental process essential for life in the womb to flourish. Detached from parental obligation other than provisional housing, liberals persist in convincing the masses that it is fully within their rights to kill as long as the current inhabitants are unborn. An abhorrent eviction notice championing the wicked while an offering of unborn sacrificial blood is dispensed. A veritable win win for liberalism.
The above maligned liberal justification for evicting life can be derived by referencing the relationship between a landlord and tenant. Insensitive as this analogy may be to those arguing in defense of life; it does present an interesting depiction of liberal rationale. The once emotionally fragile Mother-Child connection has been fecklessly corrupted adhering to unethical pre-planned societal engineering. One by which liberals placate and in some cases promotes detrimental in addition to unaccountable behavior.
The term Mother has been incessantly attacked as well as marginalized to fit the mold prepared by liberals supporting rash impersonal attachments. This uncompromising persuasive detachment allows each landlord unrestricted rights regarding the decision to evict. However cruel or callous, each tenants slaying requires no supporting documentation in determining a valid justification to kill. Killing then establishes itself as an acceptable means to an end.
To an astute observer this rational creates within itself a separate and distinct form of distorted authoritative purpose. Driven by egregious prestige and behavior supporting patterns of known malfeasance, liberals endlessly pursue mannerisms encouraging the art of self-destruction.
Contrasting the inexcusable and baseless termination of a Mother-Child connection we have substantial laws governing the methods by which tenants are to be evicted by landlords if necessary. For those unfamiliar with this process let me first begin by stating, LANDLORDS DO NOT CARRY THE AUTHORITY TO EVICT ITS TENANTS.
As a resident from the state of Florida I am forced to adhere to the below laws that dictate the removal process by which tenants are afforded. A process that is purposely non-existent or adequately granted meager consideration when referencing the intentional evacuation and imminent death of our innocent unborn.
* Only a judge can order your eviction. If so ordered, the lone authority for removal resides within the office of Sheriff.
* Florida law does not allow a landlord to forcefully remove a tenant by:
1. Restricting utilities or interrupting service, regardless if the service in question is in the landlord’s name.
2. Changing the locks or utilizing a device denying tenant’s access.
3. Removing outside doors, locks, roof, walls or windows (except for purposes of maintenance, repair or replacement).
4. Seizing the tenant’s personal property from the dwelling unless action is taken after surrender, abandonment or a lawful eviction.
* A landlord may not evict a tenant solely in retaliation for the tenant complaining to a governmental agency regarding a code violation, joining or establishing a tenant’s “union” or similar organization, or asserting other tenant rights.
* If any of these occur, the tenant may sue for actual and consequential damages or three month’s rent, whichever is greater, plus court costs and attorney’s fees.
* The eviction notice is the landlord’s request or formal demand made to the tenant. It asks the tenant to move out. It is delivered to the tenant only, and is not filed in court.
* If the tenant does not voluntarily move as requested by the eviction notice, the landlord may file an eviction case in court. The eviction case is the landlord’s request or formal demand made to the County Court. It asks the Court to evict the tenant.
* The request is made in a Summons and Complaint, which is delivered to the tenant by a process-server.
* The tenant has five business days to file a written answer to the Summons and Complaint or he/she will be evicted.
WOW, what a relief! Refreshing to realize eviction laws have detailed processes regarding the lawful representation of tenants in determination of fault. Allowances for explanations are carefully considered and taken extremely serious encompassing all involved participants. Also if eviction is certain, there is a built-in function that allows for rebuttal.
Let’s compare and contrast with Abortion Law in the state of Florida shall we?
Statutory Definition of Legal Abortion in the state of Florida:
Regulated only in last trimester, necessary to save life or preserve health of mother and requires 2 physicians’ certifications of medical necessity unless one physician certifies need for emergency medical abortion and no 2nd physician available.
Notice how the above Statutory Definition of Legal Abortion is expressed in less than four lines. A sad realization defined by our continuing inability and apathetic approach to reversing 40 years of murderous occupation. Albert Einstein once defined Insanity as:
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
I for one am willing to pursue other avenues with regard to protecting our unborn. We can’t afford to continuously defend the ravenous onslaught facing our most sacred without going on the offensive. Alongside the Personhood initiative should be legislation offering eviction standardization rights to all living occupants born and unborn.
Will you be standing in defense of life when those opposing your generosity vigorously shout you down? I WILL…