September 12, 2009
Government Controlled Health Care would (cont'd from Part II):
6) Make euthanasia a normal part of life in the United States. Because of the pressure of rationed health care, and because children will no longer be brought up with the idea that all important decisions in our life are theirs, an inevitable change will take place in the way in which people look at their lives. The nagging thought as we grow older will not be “When will I get old and sick, and how will I deal with it?”, but rather “When will I get old and sick, how much care will be allowed, and when will it be cut off?” With so much of the control of their lives being taken away by the government, many will grab for the control that is left to them via euthanasia. Significant numbers have already chosen the time of their own end in the socialized systems of Europe. The Netherlands is a stark example of this new reality. Many think that they are selfish to live “too long”.
Already, elders in our culture often go through periods of depression because, a. they find sickness too hard to deal with; or b. they don’t see much of their children; or c. they feel abandoned by their children; and usually for some period of time for all, d. they have lost their spouse. Now whole new reasons for depression will be added: e. you won’t know whether you will be able to get the procedures and operations you need; f. or when medical care might be limited to pain medication; and g. the culture around you emphasizes how many resources you are taking up and so you feel guilty about that. Euthanasia will be seen as something that will relieve the elder citizen of emotional and psychological pain, as well as benefit society. And of course there is no reason to think that euthanasia will be rationed.
7) Lead to government control of how many children you have. Giving birth to children obviously is a major health-related event for the child, the mother, the family, and society. What more reason does a GCHC program have for getting involved in such an important question as the number of children you have? Of course some socialized health programs have led to an increase of births among the right type of people. The National Socialists in Germany inherited a socialized medical system that had been established by Bismarck. The Nazis (National Socialists) used it to encourage more births in order to strengthen the German nation. (Of course the Nazis favored abortion for the Jews and the other untermenshen.)
For the United States the situation is different. The crowd that supports GCHC is very “green” in its politics. The more extreme of them think that there are way too many people already in the United States. They think that it would be better for the environment if our population were much less. Many of these people live in a time warp in which overpopulation is seen as the danger, even as we are only at “replacement level” and Europe is in an irreversible population decline.
President Obama’s science advisor John Holdren, who co-authored a book in 1977 entitled, "Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment," wrote in support of “coercive fertility control” including the forced sterilization of women. He also favored the creation of a "Planetary Regime" that would oversee human population levels and control all natural resources as a means of protecting the planet. He has since said that he does not support these things, but this author has seen the pages of the book in question. Google it if you don’t believe it.
The co-authors were Paul and Anne Ehrlich, the “Population Bomb” people. So with such advisors do you really think that a GCHC program would be favorable toward large families? If you are not allowed to make decisions about your life and death, do you really think that you will be able to make decisions about bringing a new life into this world without government “input”? The easiest method of control would be to have a “surcharge” for the third child, etc. After all, what is the “carbon footprint” of another human being? Of course the government doctors would be directed to inform the mothers after a birth that this would be a good time to tie her tubes and that the GCHC plan covers the whole thing.
More next week.