The Brave New World of Obamacare

Comment has been piling up thick and fast in the HHS contraception mandate case. Over 90% of U.S. Bishops have now protested the decision and sent letters to their flocks urging action.

Some of the MSM’s leftist pundits – even Chris Matthews! — are catching on to the fact that this case isn’t just about contraception; they are beginning to realize that the President of the United States just trashed the First Amendment to the Constitution. (How is that honorary law degree look to you now, Fr. Jenkins? Still think it was deserved?)

This is an immensely important moment for the religious freedom of Catholics in this country. We need to fight on this ground for all we’re worth. But I think it’s also important for people not to lose sight of the wider ramifications of the contraception /sterilization mandate – which also includes abortifacient drugs — as a whole and what it says about the whole concept of healthcare in this administration.

The first curious thing is that contraception, sterilization and abortifacients are included and mandated not as “reproductive health care” or something like that, but as “preventative care.” They are considered to be along the same lines as testing for AIDS and other STD’s, cancer screenings, etc. But what exactly is the dire disease that contraception, sterilization, and after the fact abortion pills prevent? There is none. They prevent pregnancy, but pregnancy is not a disease, but a normal, healthy state of a woman’s body. What then do they prevent?

In a word, they prevent people. They make sure that as many as possible of the coming generation is never conceived, or if they are, that their lives are snuffed out as efficiently as possible in the womb before birth.

Now why is this mandate considered important? Beyond the obviously ridiculous blathering about how contraception protects women’s “health” (ridiculous to anyone who has ever read the long list of dire complications included in the packaging of the Pill), HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and her minions have made the very clear declaration that these provisions “save money.” Whose money? Well women do save money by taking a pill instead having a baby, but that’s not what they really mean.

Democrats, Nancy Pelosi I think was the first, spelled it all out very clearly when the health care bill was being passed. Contraception saves taxpayers’ money. Because the fewer people born in the next generation, the fewer who will be in line for healthcare, welfare, and government dollars in general, thus leaving more for the rest of us. Let’s not forget that health care is a “limited” resource.”

So then, “the rest of us” means those who need cancer treatments and heart surgery and kidney transplants and other useful things like that – you know, actual health care? Well, not so fast. Certain people will get those things, yes. But let’s not forget President Obama’s words:

The chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here … there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance.

Yes, an independent group, totally outside the democratic process that works in secrecy until we learn the results. You might remember the flap a couple of months ago, when a caller to a conservative talk radio show claimed that he’d had an advance peek at the HHS regulations for stroke patients – and that they said that those who have strokes over the age of 70 won’t get treatment for their stroke, just palliative care? The HHS issued all kinds of denials. And yes, it’s probably too outrageous to be true, but not by much. Because this is the general philosophy those in the Obama administration live by.

Dr. Ezekiel Emmanuel, one of the architects of ObamaCare, believes that health care should be rationed according to individuals’ contribution to society, not their intrinsic worth as human beings. Isn’t it discriminatory to deny 65-year-olds the health care that 25-year-olds get? Not at all! “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination,” he says. “Every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years.” In other words – quite griping – you already had your chance!

So the mandate on contraception /sterilization / abortion is more than just an attack on the Catholic Church. It is one step in a vast program of social engineering.

Toward what goal? For enlightenment in this are I’d advise everyone to read the famous and amazingly prescient novel by Aldous Huxley, Brave New World, published exactly 80 years ago this year. Much of it reflects today.

In the A.D. 2540 time period of the book, the world’s population is carefully controlled. There is no such thing as a family. Everyone is conceived and born artificially in test tubes and petri dishes. Scientific engineering controls everything from the individual’s intelligence to how long he lives. Most ordinary workers are deliberately created with lower intelligence. The upper castes have normal intelligence. All work for the state, but the State assures that they are anything but unhappy.

Not only family, but religion and morality have been done away with. “Mother” and “father” are regarded as obscene words. Everyone is encouraged to be as sexually promiscuous as possible, starting in kindergarten, where those who don’t engage in sexual play are looked on as “abnormal.” Those few women who are allowed to remain fertile (in order to have a steady source of eggs to draw on for reproduction), engage in their “Malthusian drill” and automatically pop the regulation contraceptives provided by the state. The pink-towered Abortion Centre takes care of any failures. The worlds first bad-effect-free recreational drug, soma, is also provided to all. The purpose is for the productive members of society to be kept happy and, as far as possible, without any responsibilities outside of work. They are the world’s happiest consumers, and their consumption makes the state prosperous.

Oh, and after sixty years or so of perpetual youth, they quickly get old and die in nursing home wards, where their bodies are incinerated and spread on the fields in order to keep on being useful for society. No one lingers unduly or is ever a burden. The messiness of euthanasia is apparently eliminated, but this society would certainly be ready to engage in it if necessary.

A perfectly happy world that is in fact, abominable. (Of course, not everyone is happy, or there wouldn’t be a plot to the novel – but more about that in another installment).

Compare this to the ideal world of Obamacare: happy consumers between 18 and 49 will get all the birth control they want; they will get the major share of the health care, will largely be free of responsibility for raising the next generation, and can continue to be the world’s happiest consumers supporting the state that gave them this largesse. Unfortunately no one has found a way to eliminate old age ills and euthanasia yet. Or abortion. And oh yes, religion will be effectively silenced. The ugly little secrets of a perfect world.

Doesn’t this seem to be what Obamacare has in mind?

There’s so much more I could say about this novel, and I will if I get a chance this year.


The Brave New World of Obamacare — 2 Comments

  1. Sorry, you’ve confused civil rights which are protected and belong to people with the and old institutional prerogative to tell people how to live.
    Catholic Church wants a carve out of responsibilities , but they also want tax payer money to deliver services- selectively. Its one or the other, Church or State. The Church lost this battle a long time ago.
    Even your arguments here reveal you’d like everyone to have to live according to your belief system because you *know* best. So much for crying about rights.

  2. Sarah, your comments here don’t have anything to do with the subject of this post, which doesn’t even discuss civil rights. You must have mean to comment on the post below.

    At any rate, your contention about rights couldn’t be more wrong. It is indeed a civil rights issue – this has been recognized not only by Catholics, but by practically every other religious group across the country, and by many secular commentators as well. The first Amendment grants us the right to free exercise of our religion, and this means freedom from government coercion. No one is trying to make contraception illegal. All we are saying is “if you want to do something immoral, all right, but please don’t send us the bill for it.”

    What does the fact that some Catholic entities receive government funds have to do with it? Nothing. If I receive funds from the government and the government tells me to do something immoral, does that mean I must obey simply because I work for them? It’s been well known for some time that the U.S. government wants to oblige all Catholic healthcare providers to perform abortions (that’s next up, once this mandate has been made as palatable as possible to everyone). If the government tells me to take a human life in the womb, am I obliged to do it simply beause they are my employer? You do? Well then, you must also love the Nazi government. They told employers to cooperate in gassing Jews and killing the handicapped. “I was just following orders, I was just obeying” was their cry. So do yu think this was a good defense?

    I’m very curious as to what you think of the actual subject of this post. Do you agree that our “scarce” health ccare resources are best spent on contraception sterilization and abortion, or on stroke and cancer treatments? Isn’t this mandate and the whole healthcare syste, an example of the government telling others what to do because they “know best?” So why all the selective outrage against Catholics?

Join the conversation!