Moral Speed Limits

What if there was a Speedometer Constitutional Amendment for the right to drive at any speed using “evidence-based standards requiring the least restrictive means within human survival viability”.  How would you vote?

As a moderate Libertarian (if that category exists), I have always claimed that morality ultimately can't be legislated.  Consequently, in matters of drugs, guns, and sex, I talk a good game of lassie faire - keep the government out of my life and others also.  

But the "rubber has now hit the road" The Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and Safety proposed Ohio Constitutional Amendment now being voted upon (early voting in Ohio has already started) mandates that I declare my belief, values, political viewpoint, and moral compass. 

A.S. has motivated me to research the daylights out of this issue.  Pouring through the Pew Research Views of Abortion, reading the actual legal jargon of the amendment,  researching the Heartbeat Law now being litigated in Ohio, and reading the book "The Turnaway Study" by Diana Greene Foster PhD.   This even motivated me to send the WSJ a letter to the editor about the issue. 

The political war is now in full gear with outside money trying to influence the Ohio vote.  The WSJ (10/3/23) has done a state-by-state analysis:

So - what's my conclusion?  I am now "forced" to vote.   Like other Ohioans - only the ballot box will know.   But regardless of the November 2023 outcome - this moral issue of our time will not be resolved, nor will legislation permanently change moral behavior.

As I drive the roadways I see the legal signs, my car tells me the speed limit, I know the risks of speeding, and I know the consequences.  The law sets boundaries, and we are provided the "dignity of risk".