In his column “We pay now or we pay later,” Associate Editor Gil Smart observes:
“What I was struck by in the responses to last week’s piece, however, was not that so many people remain opposed to abortion…
“So abortion is not simply a moral issue in terms of ‘preserving life’; access to contraception is not just a religious freedom issue, though most conservatives really do seem to believe it is that. But this is also about social engineering. This is also about using the state to affect the type of behavior that conservatives believe will benefit society — something they have long accused liberals of doing…
“If we can all agree that government needs to slow its rate of spending, and I think most would agree with that, how can we afford to engage in right-wing social engineering that’s likely to drive up societal costs? How could we afford the greater cost in terms of food stamps or costs inflicted upon school districts, to name but two? Unless we’re simply not going to pay those costs. Unless we’re going to freeze or reduce budgets — as we must regardless — resulting in fewer resources even as our policy choices create more need.”…
WATCHDOG: First, a clarification. For most, abortion isn’t something they want. It is a painful decision because circumstances are not right for having a child.
Otherwise Smart hits both nails on the head: Many conservatives want social engineers, having government dictate how people should live their private lives.
Also, just as in the case of the Drug War, the issue that finally resonates with the public at large is money, especially during hard times. In the former case, we no longer can afford to incarcerate so many people. In the latter, unwanted children are often unloved and unsupported children, creating a population that in significant part will be anti-social in the actions and economically dependent on government largess
This is one of the main thrusts of Ernest Drucker’s “A Plague of Prisons.”
