Healthcare Debate – Abortion and Banning High-Heeled Shoes

The debate over abortion being covered under healthcare reform brought to mind the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984. The act required states to legislate the age of 21 years as a minimum age for purchasing and publicly possessing alcoholic beverages. If a state did not enforce the minimum age, the state would be subjected to a ten percent decrease in its annual federal highway funds.

While it wasn’t called prohibition for citizens under the age of 21, for all intents and purposes it was prohibition. When it came to equal rights for those 18 – 20 vs. billions of dollars, billions of dollars won. Rather than go through the trouble of amending the US Constitution (as the 18th amendment did to prohibit alcohol) congress took a shortcut by withholding highway funds for states that didn’t change their laws.

One of the big sticking points on healthcare reform is funding for abortions. The debate is cause for alarm about those “unforeseen” consequences of legislature, because the door opens for a host of social issues to drawn into funding for healthcare.

The objection for funding abortions is based upon moral values and fairness values. Bringing either moral or fairness issues into the debate will be the new political battleground for decades.

Here are some future moral and fairness values for debate. Should people be denied health care coverage or be charged a higher rate for any of the following?

Sexual promiscuity – should others have to pay for the consequences of promiscuity?

Not married –single people live shorter lives so there is probably a correlation to higher health costs.

Sports – football, cheerleading or any sport that could result in an injury costs more.

Smoking, being overweight, unprotected sex, not exercising, and drinking alcohol costs more.

Any action only a few people engage in could easily be added to the list if an unnecessary risk is vilified loudly enough.

None of these items listed would be made illegal; as in the congress didn’t make it illegal for those under 21 to drink alcohol; congress made it so states couldn’t afford to keep it legal. It’s not farfetched to believe an individual’s funding for healthcare could be cut off or be forced to pay more for each category they fall into. Of course you’ll still be free to pursue the activities listed above–if you are wealthy enough.

Some of the items on this list might seem silly at the moment. Keep in mind the political pendulum swings back and forth. Four or eight years from now, I can foresee a campaign speech calling for health insurance tax for bars because alcohol is a health risk and driving home from a bar puts others’ health at risk. Bars also promote the spread of STDs, so it only makes sense to tax them for enabling sex. The bar tax would be followed by the sporting arena tax….and on and on.

We could all turn into our neighbor’s unnecessary health insurance risk. Granted there are a few people who take no risks or have any vices and will benefit from this, but I’ll bet they aren’t much fun to be around.

Enjoy high-heeled shoes while you can because I’m tired of paying for your dangerous lifestyle.

Muslims of America – Camp Training Video

I hope Louis Theroux is planning a Weird Weekend with MOA/Muslims of America.

This is a test to see if Americans really believe in freedom of speech.

Free speech in America has been tested before; the MOA camp reminded me of the youth camp for the German American Bund – American Nazis in the 1930s.

If you haven’t seen the video below before, you need to be warned that it is real and not from a Star Trek alternate universe episode.

DN! Indian Environmentalist Sunita Narain on U.S. Climate Policy

Climate change debate aside, I have to question if the plan for how to fix global warming is realistic.

World leaders develop plan to change human behavior to use less fossil fuels. (Good luck with that “modifying human behavior” thing.)

World leaders all agree on same plan. (Chuckle…they are doing well when they agree to meet at the same place and time.)

All or most humans follow the plan. (Like that other time the planet followed the same plan?)

So what’s plan B?

Intervention or Revolution?

There has been a lot of talk about a second US revolution. I’d like to call for an intervention instead.

Planning the US Intervention

  1. Call an addiction treatment professional.
  2. Make a list of all the key people involved.  There are around 300 million people, so this part could take a while.
  3. Meet with the addiction treatment professional to discuss the situation. Decade-long addiction to reckless spending and wars and stealing from the bank account to fund the addiction.
  4. Make a list of the difficulties in seeking help.  Mostly apathy and cynicism.
  5. Plan the actual intervention, rehearsing what each person in the group will say to the addict. “Please stop spending money we don’t have; we are broke and you are killing us.”
  6. Schedule the actual intervention at a time when the addicted person will be available and hopefully sober. We can get a lot of people together…but the sober part just ain’t gonna happen.
  7. Confront the addict in a loving but honest manner, letting him know that the addiction is effecting more than just them.  “You are making us poor and future generations poor. If you care about us at all, please just stop.” (Burst into uncontrollable tears.)

Sometimes interventions backfire….so everyone come armed just in case.

Bernanke is World’s Greatest Counterfeiter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRZ-B14PEsc

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said that Paul had admitted off camera that Bernanke deserved the award because of his economic power. Paul replied “He is. He is the most powerful man in the world. I believe a case can be made for that…He controls the supply of money, which is the reserve currency of the world.”

The Texas congressman added, “He could create a trillion dollars in secret without any monitoring of the Congress…I think he’s more powerful than the president.”

A Second Civil War in America this Winter?

Interesting point in the video; if its possible to have a revolution in the US. If one percent of the population of the US (3 million people) were to join together they would be a larger force than all the branches of the military combined.

They are calling for a revolution over at the Democratic Underground and Free Republic.

If the left and the right fight a civil war…my bet is the right will win because they’ll have more firepower.

Bill Ayers on RussiaToday

Covers a lot of topics in 12 minutes. Mostly about building an antiwar movement.

Interesting view of how the left and right view Obama. Starts at 2:28 in video.

“One of the things that is misunderstood I think about President Obama is, he said all during the campaign. ‘I am a moderate, pragmatic, compromising politician.’  And people on the  right refuse to believe that to this day. They insist he is a secret Muslim, a secret Socialist, a secret terrorist of some kind. People on the left also distrust that statement and think secretly he is winking at them and that he has an agenda that’s to the left.”

Bible Reading Removed From Town’s Holiday Celebrations

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shffazUTNEo

The PC rules seem to say its OK to voice a belief on public property as long as that belief isn’t backed by a religious organization.

If a religious view is being voiced on public property there is the risk of a lawsuit.

Why has the separation of church and state has turned into denial of the existence of religion?

Separation of church and state was never meant to be a black marker to strike out beliefs we don’t agree with.

This case isn’t forcing religion on others any more that holding an environmental meeting and quoting Al Gore is forcing Gaia worship.