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

medical procedures.

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?

Thaddee Renault

Pro-Life Program


Return to the Unborn Children's Website