Some of the reasons why I can't support the health care bill

I'm been meaning to blog about health care for a while, but I'm always too busy. Lately I got an email from a friend I haven't seen in too long, and the discussion turned to health care reform. In lieu of sitting and writing a blog post, I'm taking the easy way out and posting excerpts from my email message. The discussion began with the estimated 20,000 who die each year from lack of health care (I'm not sure what the source of that number is - if you have a source, please comment).

I do believe there is a moral imperative to care for all people, but I think the outright murder of 1,000,000 children a year through abortion is a larger issue than the death of 20,000 a year due to lack of extraordinary care, not just in sheer numbers but in moral gravity of the matter. Considering that Obama and others have stated unequivocally that abortion *is* health care, it seems likely that the passage of this bill would further institutionalize abortion and lead to more deaths. It is estimated that covering abortion under health care would result in an additional 200,000 murders per year. So passing the health care bill results in 10x *more* deaths, not fewer.

I can't agree with the argument that making abortions cheap or free would reduce the number of them. 74% of women in 2004 listed the reason for their abortion as "a baby would change my life" (source Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions). Lack of health care is lumped in with all other financial considerations (it is not broken out of the statistics, so I can't pin a number on it), but finances are a factor in only 23% of abortions. Even in the cases of financial hardship, making abortion cheaper would certainly not make it less likely! After all, health care is not the only cost in raising a child.

Concerns of euthanasia and death panel come from the fact that the "Compassion and Choices" society (a pro-euthanasia group) was involved in the wording of the sections of the bill dealing with "end of life" issues. If euthanasia is not being considered, why would they be involved at all? In fact Obama himself said he would reconsider whether his grandmother should have had a hip replacement when she was terminally ill (flat out, definite euthanasia, if you consider how long an elderly person can live with a broken hip).

Obama's appointed health policy adviser (Ezekiel Emanuel) is the guy who literally wrote the book on eugenics. Although he claims eugenics is no longer his bag, there is no public evidence to support this and in fact he has publicly stated that the doctors should consider in treating a patient whether the money is best spent on someone else (aka eugenics). I can't give the green light to these people to make health care policy decisions without assurance in the bill itself that these issues are off the table.

As for embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), Obama's agenda has also created federal funding for ESCR at the expense of adult stem cell research funding. It is unlikely that a health care system administered by his appointees would reverse that decision. ESCR is not only immoral, it is plan old bad science, through and through (you can read my blog about it at Oh No! Not More Stem Cells!).

I am also against in-vitro fertilization (IVF) (you can read about that at When Adoption is Wrong). Is IVF covered under Obama's "reproductive health care". I don't think he's ever been asked the question. Massachusetts is one of 17 states that mandate insurance coverage for IVF, so I'd bet yes, Obamacare will cover IVF too. Another argument against it.

Despite what Obama and others have said I don't find any complicated moral issues - the moral arguments against this bill are all quite straightforward. But if you want more moral issues, consider the morality of adding 1 trillion to the national debt each year. That will quickly create a number of moral dilemmas, as we have to decide who to tax to death or who to cut what services to. Consider whether it is moral to force someone to pay for extraordinary care (or immoral procedures) under threat of prison. Consider that the current bill would still leave illegal aliens uncovered (how many of the 20,000 you quoted were illegals?). Consider that 33 million Americans don't have enough to eat (source Household Food Security in the United States, 2006), but there is no bill proposing a solution for that.

Also note that "insurance coverage" doesn't equal *care* (nor does lack of insurance mean that no care is provided). This bill provides insurance, but does nothing to address the reason why many people don't have it - the cost. Social medicine by itself doesn't reduce the cost to provide care, it simply reduces transparency and accountability. Consider the UK system, which Obama wants to model the US system on. I could write pages about the problems with that, as compared to what we have in the U.S. (perhaps another blog post).

Those are some of the reasons why I can't support the proposed health care bill. I'm sure there are more reasons, but any of the above would be enough for me.

Posted in: abortion,euthanasia,health care,morality,Obama,stem cells