The Question of Abortion in a State-Managed Health Care System is a Distraction

While watching the various politicians during this entire health-care debate asking "how do we do this?" I am noticing the glaring omission of a major question. No one is asking: "should we do this?"

One way or another they are going to further expand the Federal State into our health-care market. There isn't a debate on that issue. Not only are they not asking "should this be done," they don't want We The People asking that question either. This is why the Political Class has tossed a neat little distraction into the media: tax-funded abortions.

It has been my experience as a pro-life individual that, when it comes to the members of the Political Class, the abortion question is an insincere debate. This emotional issue is being used to distract voters from asking if it is necessary and wise to expand government further into the realm of health-care. If recent election cycles have taught us anything, it is this: politicians don't have convictions, they have platforms.

This is a truth that became painfully clear when pro-life voters were told that Democrat control of Congress and the White House will result in legislation making abortion actual law, rather than a mere court decision. Yet this is something that didn't happen before, and I believe it will never come to pass in the future. On the other side of the issue, pro-choice voters were told that Republican control of Congress and the White House will mean legislation making abortion entirely illegal; something that also never came to pass.

The truth is, the politicians will never entirely solve any issue, especially an emotional mine-field like abortion. The Political Class needs these issues to remain unresolved so that they can convince us that we need them to fix these problems. Never mind the fact that they cause most of these problems in the first place. If they actually solved these hot-button issues in one direction or the other, they would have less to use when they need to pander for votes and money.

From my own experience as a pro-lifer, a simple look at recent experience of the 2008 presidential election demonstrates an offensive lack of sincerity on the part of the so-called "pro-life Republicans." That was an election that gave us pro-lifers two laughable choices. One ticket presented us with a guy who worked against the few people in Congress who were honestly pro-life, supported embryonic fetal experimentation, happily accepted pro-choice endorsements, and had been financed by socialists like George Soros and Teresa Hienz Kerry for the better part of the past decade. On the other ticket was Senator Barack Obama.

Senator Brownback, another self-proclaimed pro-life candidate for president in the 2008 election, later went on to personally host a warm welcome for President Obama's enthusiastically pro-choice candidate for Secretary of Health and Human Services, then-governor of Kansas, Kathleen Seblius. Rather than so much as question her views on State-funded abortion, Brownback promised to personally see her through a successful confirmation process!

A major reason for selecting Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate may have been to alleviate the worries pro-life and conservative voters who continued to regard McCain as insincere in his pro-life and conservative overtures. But after the election, the self-proclaimed pro-life Republican Governor went on to appoint a former Planned Parenthood board member, Judge Morgan Christen, to Alaska's Supreme Court. This happened in March of 2009, about the same time that Brownback escorted Kathleen Seblius through a safe confirmation process.

The efforts of the so-called pro-life Republicans is laughable because it is so transparently insincere. That's also what makes it so appalling. How, then, are we to take these people seriously when they say they are debating the question of government funded abortion?

I look at the debates staged by Politicians as mere shadows on the walls of Plato's Cave. As the Political Class continues to distract us in the Private Class by waving their arms in front of the fire (television cameras), and casting images on the wall (our living rooms), many people don't think to look at what's happening right outside in the real world. Or at least, that's what the politicians are hoping. Personally, I think more people understand exactly what's happening than the clueless fools in Versailles D.C. realize.

It is because I am pro-life that I find it contemptible when members of the Political Class use the abortion issue to pander to the emotions of the Private Class, and to attempt to distract us. People who take this issue seriously, on either side of the debate, should be deeply angered and offended at every one of the politicians in Washington. Shame on them!

Sources:

Corsi, Jerome. "John McCain Funded By Geroge Soros Since 2001." World Net Daily, 12 Feb 2008. 13 Dec 2009 http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=56177>.

Ertelt, Steven. "Pro-life Senator Rick Santorum Says John McCain Not Passionately Pro-Life." Life News, 14 Jan 2008. 13 Dec 2009 http://www.lifenews.com/nat3612.html>.

Fagan, Dan. "Palin Appoints Former Planned Parenthood Board Member To Alaska Supreme Count." The Alaska Standard, 5 March 2009. http://www.thealaskastandard.com/?q=node/559>.

Gilbert, Kathleen and Steve Jalsevac. "ALL's Judie Brown on Sen. Brownback: 'I'll Never Use Pro-Life to Describe Him Again.'" Life Site News, 3 March 2009. 13 Dec, 2009 http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/mar/09030303.html>.

Johnson, Douglas. "How John Mccain Threatens the Pro-Life Cause." NRLC, 20 Feb 2000. 13 Dec 2009 http://web.archive.org/web/20060926070641/http://www.nrlc.org/news/2000/NRL02/doug.html>.

"Senator Santorum: McCain Unreliable on Life Issues." Catholic New Agency, 16 Jan 2008. 13 Dec 2009 http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=26460>.