WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT FUNDING NON-MEDICAL SURGERY?
The New Brunswick State Council has on two occasions in the past two years
made written representations to the Premier of the province and to all
members of the New Brunswick Legislature, concerning the illegitimate
funding of abortion by N.B. Medicare.
Knights have never waivered from the belief of the Church which rightfully
describes abortion as an abominable state-sanctioned crime against the most
defenseless members of humanity, the preborn children. However, many still
consider this to be a mere religious or moral position that infringes on
what they define as the reproductive
'rights' of women to do whatever they please with their bodies (under the
assumption that whatever is legal is morally okay).
There are clear precedents and strictly practical reasons for refusing to
pay for abortions. In 1993, for instance, the German high court (which
ironically under Hitler had rationalized and legalized the 'choice' of
destroying unwanted humans) ruled that
their socialized medical system could not fund abortion. Also, the U.S.,
where 1.6 million babies are destroyed every year, have passed a
constitutional amendment which virtually bans the use of federal dollars to
pay for abortion in the American Medicare program.
There are no intellectually coherent argument to defend forcing taxpayers to
fund abortion. In fact the arguments against such a policy are overwhelming
and these form the basis of the New Brunswick Knights` objections to this
illegitimate funding of abortion, one which fails to meet the guidelines
established by Medicare for funding
1. The basic principle one could invoke right off is that no democratic
government can force those who believe in the biologically obvious fact that
abortion is the brutal destruction of innocent human life to fund this
practice, against their conviction and their will. Such a policy is
patently tyrannical, an indefensible and unjustifiable violation of
conscience and of freedom.
2. Abortion advocates argue vigorously that the government should not be
involved in any way in a woman`s decision to abort. But forcing other
people to pay for it completely denudes their position of any credibility.
It is intellectually dishonest to
argue that the state has no business whatsoever over the choice to abort but
then has total responsibility to pay for the execution of this choice.
3. The purpose of health insurance is to provide for the healing of
sickness. Pregnancy is not a disease, or sickness, and no one would claim
that it is... with the exception, that is of many radical feminists who view
the fetus as a parasite. In strictly medical terms abortion is akin to
cosmetic surgery. Both are entirely voluntary procedures which do not
restore a person from a state of sickness to a state of health. Forcing
taxpayers to pay for other people`s health care is one thing; forcing us to
pay for voluntary, discretionary, convenience surgery is quite another. It
is inconceivable that, in this era of long delayed non-emergency surgery,
much needed surgical time in some of our New Brunswick hospitals is being
consumed by abortion. Over 99.5% of this surgical time could be devoted to
life-saving surgery, that all too often is postponed due to lack of space
and heavy demand.
4. Unwanted pregnancies occur by people choosing to have sex when they are
not ready for children but with the awareness of a chance of pregnancy, and
are therefore the result of voluntary risk-taking. It is absurd to suggest
taxpayers ought to be forced to pay to get people out of situations in which
they find themselves through lack of self-control, responsibility, and
judgement. The provincial government in effect currently forces taxepayers
to subsidize not only abortion, but also promiscuity and delinquency.
5. The abortion movement organizes itself around the word "choice." When
arguing for legalized abortion, advocates argue "freedom of choice" and
claim their opponents want to deny people "freedom of choice". How can they
then insist on forcing people - against their will - to pay for these
choices? Hypocritically they also argue no one
should impose their morality on others. How can they and the government
then claim that forcing people to pay for what they believe is killing does
not constitute forcing their morality on other people? Really the hypocrisy
here is mind-boggling.
Supporters of tax-funded abortion on demand have conned governments in
granting public funded abortions to whomever request them, claiming that a
right to abortion isn`t worth much if one can`t afford to exercise it.
Well, this self-proclaimed intellectual elite should realize that, in the
words of a respected television
commentator: "Freedom of speech doesn`t get you a megaphone. Freedom of
religion doesn`t buy you transportation to church." It shouldn`t be that
hard for anyone to grasp that these are rights against government
interference, not rights to a government-financed supply of the alleged
right in question.
With abortion, taxpayers are forced to pay for elective surgery that has
nothing to do with health. It treats no medical, psychiatric or social
problem. Abortion in fact fosters a crisis in health care because it
creates costly physical (e.g. breast cancer) and crippling psychological
(e.g. post-abortion syndrome) complications, not only for
the aborted woman, but for those New Brunswickers who need life-saving surgery.
These arguments would seem self-evident to the majority of Canadians and New
Brunswickers. Should they not also be to our government decision makers,
particularly officials of our Department of Health who decide on the
appropriatness of the various provincially funded medical procedures?
Return to the Unborn Children's Website