by Andrew Smeja

Created on: November 07, 2009   Last Updated: November 08, 2009

I would first like to take the emotional appeal out of this debate by putting the shoe on the other foot. Should life saving blood transfusions be covered in the federal health care proposal? According to Jehovah's Witnesses, receiving blood transfusions is immoral.

What if Jehovah's witnesses were the majority? You might be living in a world where you die because of a car accident, a blood transfusion would have saved your life, but you won't be able to get one because it's immoral.

If the government is allowed to decide whether or not we can get an abortion because its a moral issue, you have to wonder what kind of procedures they will be able to ban in the future on moral grounds. The morals of the majority will change over time, you may in the future find yourself in a world where the morals of the majority are harsh, and that your rights are being trampled on simply because it is what most people think is right. Only you, with the advice of your doctor, should be able to decide what medical procedures you should or should not get.

The issue is not one of morality. Regardless of what you do people will get abortions. If their health care plans cover abortions, then they will be able to get one under the best circumstances, with a medical professional performing the procedure to insure that disease is not spread and that the health of the mother is not endangered.

The alternative is women jumping up and down a lot, smoking, or drinking alcohol in order to have an "abortion", the kind they can afford. When this happens it can be worse if the baby is born, it could develop birth defects effectively handicapping it. It's hard enough to compete for jobs in our society, more handi-capped children are not the answer.

Writing laws on moral grounds is a slippery slope. If we allow the government the power to tell us what kind of medical procedures we can get today, they are going to tell us what medical procedures we have to get tomorrow. If your an authoritarian this may be a good thing, but for the rest of us who don't want to be told that we have to get implants or tracking devices for our own safety, this would be a tragedy.

You might think abortion is wrong, or right. Thats not important. What is important, is whether or not you think the government should be able to pass laws based on subjective value systems. One person might think its immoral to have an abortion, I think its immoral to bring a child into this world without the love of at least one of its parents.

Regardless, do you really want to give the government the power to pass laws based on morals? The baby boomer generation is on the way out, you'll soon find out what kind of values the next generation has. The question is whether or not you'll find out about the values because they are legislated.

Learn more about this author, Andrew Smeja.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.