There are a lot of people running around with some interesting ideas about rights. To many, when they don't get what they
want, their rights have been violated. Some shmuck at the local paper is up in arms because maybe someday Uncle Sam may
consider reining in subsidies for pregnant women who'd prefer to snuff out their "mistakes." Horrors! Can you imagine the
thought that people need to be responsible for their actions? The concept sends shivers down the spine, doesn't it? Here's my
response:
Dear Ms. Hutchison,
Your article about abortion rights illustrates the entitlement mindset in this country. Set aside for a moment the morality of the
act of abortion. Let's also ignore whether a human being should have the right to abort a fetus. Instead, concentrate on the
meaning of "rights."
An individual in a truly free society has the right not to be subject to force or fraud from others. These are known as negative
rights. You have the right not to be raped, robbed or murdered. No one else has to give up his rights in order to let you have
yours. Simple enough.
Now, let's examine your idea of a "right." According to you, women not only have the right to abortion-on-demand, they also
have the right to have it subsidized by the federal government. Any suggestion of a freeze, a restriction, or total elimination in
such spending is anathema.
But the government cannot create wealth out of thin air. It must first be created by individuals cooperating with one another
through voluntary means before being confiscated through the coercive power of the state. Taxation in and of itself is an
infringement on individual rights. It uses violence or the threat of violence to fund activities that free people would not support,
and if they would, there would not be any need for government or taxation to begin with!
What you're really implying but not admitting is that you and other pro-choice advocates aren't willing to voluntarily fund these
activities on your own. Instead you've conspired with Uncle Sam to force all of us to share in this wonderful "right" called
abortion.
Whether you disagree with the pro-life position is quite irrelevant in this argument. What's important is that you know the
pro-life crowd finds abortion to be a murderous act, yet you demand that they help pay for it. If that isn't the definition of
tyranny, what is? And if the government is powerful enough to make them pay for something they think is immoral, don't be
surprised if that same power is used against you. Raw political power is a double-edged sword.
If you want to be true to your cause and financially help poor women terminate their pregnancies, that's your business. I suggest
that you put your money where your mouth is. Open your checkbook if you must, but leave my wallet alone. I have no desire to
participate in your idea of "family planning."