Quote Originally Posted by MMI View Post
(Now I've put it that way, I'm surprised there's so much right-wing resistance to the idea)
It has nothing to do with right-wing/left-wing. I am slightly to the right of center on my views. It has to do with my belief that the health care bill is a trojan horse of sorts.

Progressives have been taking baby steps in changing America for years. Oliver Wendell Holmes (during his time as a Supreme Court Justice) wrote an opinion for the Court upholding Virginia's compulsory sterilization law in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), where he found no constitutional bar to state-ordered compulsory sterilization of an institutionalized, allegedly "feeble-minded" woman. Holmes wrote, "We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. ... three generations of imbeciles are enough." While his detractors point to this case as an extreme example of his moral relativism, other legal observers argue that this was a consistent extension of his own version of strict utilitarianism, which weighed the morality of policies according to their overall measurable consequences in society and not according to their own normative worth. Needless to say, Holmes was admired by the Progressives of his day.

I've italicized and made bold the text that applies to my viewpoint. He used one thing to EXPAND UPON and try to introduce another thing. He was trying to use that case to introduce PERMANENT sterilization. Who is to say that the health care bill won't open the door for Progressives to impose restrictions and/or penalties upon the public? They might not, but chances are very likely that SOMEONE will. The people in power today that are assuring us that this will not happen are not the same people that will be in power when our children and grandchildren are older.

Those who insist that this will not happen and pish-posh the naysayers, can you with 100% CERTAINTY, guarantee that it will not happen? If you can't, why are you taking a chance with the future?