Steven Gerard Sidlovsky, S.F.O. thinks a statewide option for pro-life zoning is a good idea, and he wants Cincinnati's support in drafting the bill.
In a recent letter to City Council, Sidlovsky introduces the concept of the Life Peace Zone, a new zoning designation that would be available to any community in the state of Ohio if a proposed Ohio Bill for Life makes it through the state legislature.
The legislation would work as an umbrella overlay, preventing the construction of any clinic or other medical facility that provides abortions from setting up a practice in that area.
Any clinic already in operation would be forced to cease operations, though Sidlovsky says that the neighborhood could "peacefully and diplomatically encourage" the clinic to undergo a change of practice.
Sidlovsky estimates that 25 percent of pro-choice people will be supportive of the Life Peace Zone as a "Constitutional right".
In the letter, Sidlovsky says that people have been generally optimistic about what he calls an Interfaith, all-partisan idea.
"This receptivity leads me to conclude that many cities throughout Ohio and the rest of the United States would welcome establishing themselves as Life Peace Zones," he said.
Sidlovsky visited nine Cincinnati neighborhoods in 2007 and three in 2008, and is urging residents to send letters of support to their community council presidents.
His letter to Council has been referred to the City Manager's office for a report, which is due by March 19.
Sidlovsky is an adjunct instructor at the University of Cincinnati's Department of Mathematical Sciences.
Friday, February 29, 2008
'Life Peace Zones' for Ohio, Cincinnati?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(Atom)
Recent Comments
15 comments:
Im sorry but any legislation denying an a womans rights is a bad idea. Why is this in a blog about building Cincinnati, is it not bad enough we have to put up with Bill Cunningham.
Ridiculous, Cincinnati has become a progressive city so I doubt the city would ever support something so idiotic. Steven Gerard Sidlovsky needs to get out of Ohio and try his antics in another state.
I wonder if the proposed legislation also includes a section which states that any person who lives in a "Life Peace Zone" and who serves in the armed forces cannot be sent to war, or that any person who commits a crime in the Zone cannot be executed under the death penalty.
Oh wait, that's right -- killing is ok, except when it gives a woman control over her own body.
Sounds ok to me AS long as they setup a pro-choice zone the same size. And where no one can protest.
Sounds fair to me if those conditions are met.
Who are these nut cases? I am so over these right-to-lifers trying to impress these whacked-out laws upon society and our Constitution.
This guy and Phil Burress/Citizens for Community Values should move to Nebraska because they all give our city/region a bad name.
"Why is this in a blog about building Cincinnati, is it not bad enough we have to put up with Bill Cunningham."
First of all, I gave no opinion on the matter. I don't appreciate the comparison to Bill Cunningham, who is an ideologue, and an idiot.
Secondly, this issue has to do with a rewriting of zoning laws, a topic I often cover here.
Finally, any legislation that could possibly put a legal, tax-paying business OUT of business is somewhat important, I would think.
Glad to see my fellow Cincinnatians reject this proposal. You all make me proud! Conservative my ass...
Damn straight, a woman should have the right to kill her child. That's what your saying, right?
Kevin, thank you for bringing up this issue. Brother Stephen has been showing up at neighborhood councils unsolicited, and emailing all neighborhood councils. You are correct this is a zoning issue but it is something he is trying to take to the state for approval. He was at the neighborhood summit as well...he is relentless and honestly, rather annoying. One of those "here is what I believe in and I am going to cram it down your throat until you agree with me". I have my own personal opinion on this issue which I do not debate with people but I definatley do no like this guys approach to this issue.
Yes, that's what I'm saying. I think up to 54 months is reasonable.
I would be interested in hearing more about how receptive community groups have really been to his idea. He claims to have a lot of support, but is this true or is he over-estimating its appeal?
kevin lemaster said "...any legislation that could possibly put a legal, tax-paying business OUT of business is somewhat important, I would think."
This is a very dumb comment considering organizations like "Planned Parenthood" get $300,000,000 in tax payer money per year and are non profit which means they are not a tax paying business. They are stealing tax payers money by operating in our city.
Secondly, a baby in the womb is not part of the mothers body, the baby has different DNA, ask any geneticist including a pro choice geneticist and they will tell you that the baby is a separate life from the mother.
No, what is a dumb comment is not taking into account the fact that employees pay payroll taxes to the municipality in which their located, which was kind of the point I was making about a legally-operating business closing down.
As to your second point, this is not the place to debate the pros and cons of abortion, when conception starts, etc. This is a development blog, and there are better blogs that this one where that topic can be hashed out.
As far as this blog goes, we will continue to operate under the fact that abortion clinics are legal until Roe v. Wade is overturned, without making a value judgement either pro-life or pro-choice, which is immaterial to my post.
Since this blog is about the built environment, I'll simply ask this: where does this lead exactly? When something that had been zoned into an area is no longer allowed, do they have to move? Are they grandfathered in? Does an eminent-domain type of process take over? I think this is another flash in the pan for this group to bring attention to their views. You'd think they would do something that actually stood a chance.
^ Typically, any building's use is grandfathered in when the zoning changes. They will only run into zoning changes if they try to renovate or expand, at which point they would need either a variance, a zoning change, or some kind of notwithstanding ordinance that will let them continue with their non-conforming use.
From the sounds of this designation, however, it appears that it would not be a part of a municipal zoning code, but rather part of the Ohio Revised Code, available for use by whichever municipality sees fit. It would be implemented as an overlay, and would complement rather than replace the municipal zoning code.
And from how I read it, the law would force a non-conforming (e.g. abortion providing) business to cease operations. There would be no grandfathering.
Post a Comment