The Health Care Bill and the Party of Death

DEMOCRATS WANT TO FORCE YOU TO BECOME AN ACCESSORY TO THE KILLING OF OTHER HUMAN BEINGS

Editorial by Harry Hunter

(Dec. 9, 2009)  — Yesterday the Senate defeated Sen. Ben Nelson’s proposed amendment to the health care bill. It would have barred insurance companies that receive federal tax dollars from offering plans to cover abortion. So it is entirely possible that Obamacare will require taxpayers to become accessories to the killing of unborn human beings. It is not politically correct to call that practice murder, but it certainly violates the conscience of those who take “Thou shalt not kill” seriously.

But not to worry, since Mighty Media is suggesting that nothing important is going on. Your taxpayer-funded National Public Radio barely mentioned today’s Senate vote and then went on to detailed analysis of more important matters like the government’s multi-billion dollar settlement with certain of our Indians for land use. At Newsweek’s “The Gaggle” blog, the underplaying was the straight in-your-face kind, with a piece by Sarah Kliff on Dec. 8 entitled, “Why the Senate’s Abortion Debate Does Not Matter,” found at http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/12/08/why-the-senate-s-abortion-debate-does-not-matter.aspx

Kliff’s take on the debate is all about political horsetrading, and she implies that one should not be concerned because the so-called public option may not survive anyway, and then abortion funding would stay as is. (At present the ban on public funds to subsidize abortion depends entirely on annual renewal of the Hyde Amendment, which seems like a rather precarious perch.) But then the waters muddy. Senator Nelson has promised to filibuster the health care bill if his amendment failed, as it unfortunately has, but Kliff’s view is that “If [Harry] Reid can get Olympia Snowe or Susan Collins to vote for health- care reform, then he no longer needs Nelson’s vote. In this situation, Nelson’s filibuster threat becomes irrelevant . . . .” Oh, I get it, Kliff is trying to reassure liberals not to worry because the two Republican ladies from Maine, whom she styles as “centrist” and “moderate” pro-choicers, may end up supporting the liberals.

Personally, I do not consider anyone who supports elective abortion to be “centrist” or “moderate.” Medicine is properly “the healing art,” and there is nothing healing about an abortion. It is the killing of a living human being. When was the fetus ever not human? When was it ever not living? Pregnancy is the most natural thing in the world; it is not some disease to be cured by the practice of the healing art of medicine. With very rare exceptions, abortion is not really a medical procedure at all and has no business in any government health care plan. But the liberals insist that it be included in Obamacare, perhaps disguised by some phony accounting shell game. That is one valid reason to call Obamacare a Death Care plan.

In discussing the abortion issue once with a humanist/socialist/communist—he may have fit all three of those terms, but I don’t want to split hairs—he actually argued that an unborn child had no human rights because it had no birth certificate. If that kind of logic were applied to our putative president, we would have to conclude that Barack Hussein Obama is not only a possible illegal alien but also not even human. Such a “logical” conclusion would be entirely consistent with the once-widespread belief that Obama is the One. Hence Barack Obama might go down in history as TWETAP: The Worst Extraterrestrial American President. The poor thing could never show his birth certificate because he did not have one.

If Obama/Pelosi/Reid want to issue an engraved invitation to a New American Tea Party, one that might be highly reminiscent of the Boston Tea Party in 1773, they are on the right track. By abusivily using the power of taxation to coerce a great many citizens to violate their belief in the right to life, the liberals/progressives/socialists would be just begging this country to come apart at the seams. “Thou shalt not kill” could then become archaic indeed.