I was discussing with a friend how the prolife conservatives believe it is inherently unconstitutional for the federal govt to mandate and regulate health care choices.
This friend, who has an even greater interest and experience in studying church-state history in order to understand the progression of govt, had suggested there could be a good use of federalized health care that is normally considered not govt business: What if there was a widespread epidemic, and it helped to organize resources in advance to reach the populations affected because federal structures were already in place? Could it be divine intervention that such systems be set up now, before it is seen as necessary, so that if some emergency outbreak happens in the future, the federal govt can deal with it globally?
Now, when I read about the Zika virus, for example, there isn't a vaccine in place as there is for Rubella which was also known to cause birth defects if the mother contracts it during pregnancy.
With Zika, there are two weeks that the mother would be affected and could pass it to the unborn child. There is no way to demand that people carrying Zika be put in "isolation" to prevent from being bitten by the particular mosquito that can carry it to a pregnant mother. So this risk is going to be out there.
So what if a virus like Zika did spread and create a rash of deformed babies or infants at risk of dying within their first month.
For the people who are prolife and also against federalized health care:
Would you still keep the same approach, of allowing the births to go forward with no choice of abortion? If a wave of unborn or newborn babies all turned out to need specialized care, would you support the federal govt paying for all this medical care?
What solution would YOU support if something happened on a epidemic scale:
Would you allow for abortions or just let the babies be born and live until they died naturally as with any other situation?
Would you support medical care through the federal govt to cover the costs of lifelong treatment for these children born with multiple problems (from microencephaly to loss of eyesight, and possible slower development or retardation).
This friend, who has an even greater interest and experience in studying church-state history in order to understand the progression of govt, had suggested there could be a good use of federalized health care that is normally considered not govt business: What if there was a widespread epidemic, and it helped to organize resources in advance to reach the populations affected because federal structures were already in place? Could it be divine intervention that such systems be set up now, before it is seen as necessary, so that if some emergency outbreak happens in the future, the federal govt can deal with it globally?
Now, when I read about the Zika virus, for example, there isn't a vaccine in place as there is for Rubella which was also known to cause birth defects if the mother contracts it during pregnancy.
With Zika, there are two weeks that the mother would be affected and could pass it to the unborn child. There is no way to demand that people carrying Zika be put in "isolation" to prevent from being bitten by the particular mosquito that can carry it to a pregnant mother. So this risk is going to be out there.
So what if a virus like Zika did spread and create a rash of deformed babies or infants at risk of dying within their first month.
For the people who are prolife and also against federalized health care:
Would you still keep the same approach, of allowing the births to go forward with no choice of abortion? If a wave of unborn or newborn babies all turned out to need specialized care, would you support the federal govt paying for all this medical care?
What solution would YOU support if something happened on a epidemic scale:
Would you allow for abortions or just let the babies be born and live until they died naturally as with any other situation?
Would you support medical care through the federal govt to cover the costs of lifelong treatment for these children born with multiple problems (from microencephaly to loss of eyesight, and possible slower development or retardation).
