Commentary by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director
The controversy over President Barack Obama's plan to reform health care in America has led to one of the most contentious political debates in modern history. Some of those who feel most threatened are seniors who recognize Medicare is targeted for $500 billion in cuts. Their concerns are justified and seniors should be afraid--deathly afraid--because it is certain one day bureaucrats will make life and death decisions over the medical care the elderly will receive based on economics alone. According to data, 25% of Medicare's budget is spent on the last year of a person's life.
However, there is a dirty and deadly little secret regarding what health care reform would mean to human beings whose life outside the womb has not yet begun. I'm talking about the innocent unborn and since Obama decided the health care system in America, which represents over one-sixth of the nation's economy, needs to be put under government control, the issue of abortion has come to the forefront.
Some have speculated on the strategies being implemented by those who believe in abortion rights. In an excellent WorldNetDaily piece written by Jill Stanek, titled "Why pro-aborts went silent on healthcare" [http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=107335], the former labor and delivery nurse addresses the varied tactics being used by groups like NARAL regarding the debate over the health care issue. NOTE: Jill Stanek exposed the barbaric procedure which many call "live-birth abortion", a medical practice which allowed newborns who survived abortions to be left to die without any medical intervention. Barack Obama, while a state senator from Illinois, voted against a bill that would have banned the practice (Born-Alive Infant Protection Act). George W. Bush eventually signed into law legislation banning the practice.
As Stanek and others point out, the pro-abortion lobby has taken an ambiguous approach regarding the health care reform debate. However, recently the pro-abortion community has, for the most part, kept its political powder dry concerning open promotion of Obamacare. And for those who believe the killing of the innocent unborn is a Constitutional right, keeping silent on the issue is a wise strategy. As Stanek points out, this seems to be their tactics of late.
The deadly little secret regarding any health care reform bill is the fact abortion is lawful. Therefore, legislation put forth by either the United States Senate or the U.S. House of Representatives would not specifically have to address the subject. Since abortion is seen or interpreted as a form of "medical care", the pro-abortion lobby is recognizing there is no need to generate even more controversy by making abortion an issue in the legislation which the far left so desperately seeks.
If you are looking for proof regarding how taxpayers would be footing the bill for women seeking abortions, you need look no further than the Democratic response to amendments that would exclude abortion funding from any health care reform legislation. Indeed, there have been numerous attempts by pro-life Republicans to introduce amendments that would ban abortion in any Obamacare bill, but each attempt has been soundly defeated by the Democratic majority which controls both Houses of Congress.
This is a rare case where proof is offered by a negative. The pro-abortion lobby fully understands their goals concerning the coverage of abortions would be included in any attempt to reform national health care, unless such provisions against the practice are specifically written into the legislation. And, sadly, with abortion being the law of the land, the procedure would automatically come under "women's health care".
These facts have left groups like NARAL and Planned Parenthood in a quandary. With recent polling, for the first time, indicating over 50% of Americans now consider themselves pro-life, putting abortion in the forefront of this political debate would be counter-productive. It would be one more obstacle in the way of health care reform which is quickly losing public support day by day.
But there is a reality regarding abortion and those who provide the procedure which cannot be denied. The taking of innocent human life is a multi-billion dollar business. Indeed, abortion is an industry which puts big dollars in the pockets of abortion providers (like Planned Parenthood--the nation's largest) and subsequently, politicians. One bloody hand washes the other. Yet polling indicates even some Americans who support abortion would not favor requiring taxpayers to subsidize this so-called "choice".
Even though the pro-abortion lobby may try to keep a low profile in the debate over health care reform, those like myself who believe in the sanctity of human life must not be silent. The thief often comes during the dark of night and, in this case, the ultimate and deadly goal of this thievery is human life.
Life from conception to our latter years is under attack by this health care reform initiative which devalues the precious gift God has given us. The motives of the left cannot be swept under the proverbial rug. The ideology promoted by the Obama administration has been made crystal clear since his first day in office. One of President Obama's first edicts was to continue U.S. funding of abortion abroad. We should not be fooled in thinking this anti-life agenda is not meant for us all. Therefore, the pro-aborts can be silent on this issue in their attempt to deceive the American public. However, those who hold life precious should be vocal regarding the deadly secret.
Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: Dan@rffm.org
NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.
"This is a rare case where proof is offered by a negative."
Proof is never offered by a negative. Instead of seeing factual analysis of a current issue, I see the same old argument and supposition. Oddly enough, Palin defends her Death Panel comments in much the same way.
"Well, no, the bill doesn't actually SAY that, but here is why it will lead to euthanasia." And then proceeds to offer the same supposition-based arguments to support her case.
Sorry, this stuff no longer washes.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Whereas euthanasia is not the law of the land in America, abortion is. Therefore, Obamacare does NOT have to specifically address abortion. It would not specifically have to address the removal of an appendix either. Both abortion and other medical procedures that are lawful would be covered in any bill dealing with health issues. Subsequently, Mr. Hector is inaccurate.
Posted by: hector | August 20, 2009 at 08:42 AM