Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Don't You Statists Understand?

Of course, I suppose on its face to be Liberal means to want to have it both ways. But the current flap over the Stupak amendment really illustrates that in a delicious way.

Now, to be clear, I am pretty staunchly pro-choice. That's not the point. The point is: when you turn over these functions to government, you have to live with the results of being controlled by others (other voters, other officials, elected and not, etc.). This is THE fundamental small-government argument in the freedom agenda: choose for yourself, or let others choose for you. You won't always like the choices of the others.

You cannot have it both ways. Take this abortion argument: regardless of your own view, this is an issue of serious contention in the US, and pro-lifers have some solid arguments. You may disagree with their moral point of view, but you must acknowledge they have a right to feel what they feel and advocate for it. So, the fact that they are represented and considered and, in this case, get something they want, means that by adopting a state-controlled process for obtaining health care liberals must suffer the establishment of some new compromises in the form of new restrictions on access to abortion.

Tough frickin' luck, statists. This is the deal you make with the state and you better learn to like it. No, you DON'T get to hand over what was once our autonomous, variegated, and yes at times chaotic health system to the feds AND have everything work the way your lefty agenda wants it. Instead, you subject yourself to the will of the "whole", and that whole includes pro-lifers as well as, among other things, holocaust deniers and Scientologists and every other kind of bullshit under the sun. But they vote, and they get their voice, and now you are stuck with it.

It's like the NEA. Don't like crosses dipped in pee? Too bad--the collective decided to fund it. Oh, and by the way, one day when they make Ollie North the NEA Chair and all we get are revivals of South Pacific from coast to coast, I for one will be laughing my ass off at you idiots for what you have wrought.

Unfortunately our health care is less of a laughing matter. You are about to turn over this autonomy to a monolith that will shut down a lot of your autonomy in the name of "access." It's a gigantic step away from individual freedom and responsibility (and CHOICE [pun intended]), and towards a collectivist nightmare. Call these crocodile tears for your stupid selling of your freedoms.

1 comment:

Lydia Vann said...

At a time when Americans are desperately looking for an alternative to the democratic party, it is essential to understand that it is fiscal conservatism Americans seek... yet most do not know it's name.

The term 'conservative' has long been painted by liberal media to pertain to certain social issues. Yet, recent debate on the House Health Care bill have shown us that social conservatism is alive and well in both parties, and therefore is not the defining difference between democrats and republicans.

OPPORTUNITY. Educate the Hill republicans to understand this difference between social and fiscal conservatism and the great need in this country to address the latter rather than the former. Then get a contract with said politicians to honor fiscal, free market, small government principals. Armed with this, win back control of all or enough branches of government to save the country from ruin.