Future of unborn at stake

February 17, 2012 at 9:57 am  | Mobile Reader | Print 

It all started when President Barack Obama, in his socialization of medicine, decided that everone had to help pay for birth control even though some religions do not condone it. In a democracy where freedom of religion is one of its foundations, is that right?

This country’s politicians need to recognize that what they want is not necessarily what they should provide the country’s people. Democracy should not work that way.

We can go back to the Bill of Rights or the Constitution and nowhere will we find opportunism to pass laws or issue mandates that violate the will of the people. Public officials have to step back and make way for freedom of beliefs and allow people to live accordiing to them.

Obama made a big error in proposing such inclusion in his medical program that created government control of one sixth of the nation’s economy. Now he has somewhat retracted his requirements of religious indiferrence and will allow some of his constituents to bipass the requirement.

Why, in the first place, do we have to require people to prescribe to a specific medical formula devised by Obama. That is not free enterprise nor democracy. Nor is it the most inexpensive and efficient way to provide medical services.

Here in Louisiana, since Huey Long, everyone has had the most-needed medical services whether they could afford it or not without expensive socialized medicine. Anything else needed could be provided with little extra expense from the citizens.

Why put their beliefs on the line by making them pay for treatments against their religions? It’s not understandable why an American President would propose such a thing.