For the last few years I've heard much about the aging population of the United States and the stresses it will bring to health care and Social Security. There is a shortage of health care workers qualified in treatment of the elderly. It is increasingly difficult to keep nursing homes staffed with qualified and caring individuals. There aren't enough people in the workforce to sustain the demand on Social Security placed on the system by the aging population and still have some when the workers of today retire. For the most part, we are speaking of the "baby boomers."
However, we should be extremely thankful to the baby boomers. Because of their contributions to the social and political thought that has shaped the policies of the nation, they may have created the perfect environment to solve the problems they will cause the nation as they age. They have created an atmosphere where the pursuit of happiness — even at the expense of more fundamental liberties — is the ultimate goal. They have created an atmosphere of utility and convenience. If someone or something is inconvenient or useless, get rid of them or it.
The facts consistently bear that a vast majority of abortions are contraceptive in nature — that is, the child is killed for other reasons than rape, incest or life of mother. The baby boomers have legalized abortion and defended it vehemently — even into the third trimester. How sad that children are viewed as an inconvenience. I wonder, though, if the boomers have the insight to see what lies in store for them. If a mother finds her own child inconvenient, how much more so will she find an entire sector of the population she does not know who bear an ever-increasing burden on her health care costs and use up money set aside for her at her retirement?
Thankfully, the boomers have created an anti-life political arena that will have no qualms about passing legislation for euthanasia. Just think of all the money that could be saved for Social Security by drastically eliminating the numbers of those drawing upon it. Also, the skyrocketing costs of health care and prescriptions could be brought back under control, and the money saved could go into research.
Many will dismiss this as "slippery slope" argumentation. I hope those who do are right. Remember though, it is illogical to assume that the anti-life ideals promoted by one generation for the sake of a burden-free and convenient youth for themselves will not also carry on into the next generation. With this generation not having to deal with the burden of kids (were it not for immigration, the United States would be below replacement level for population growth), the only burdens left will be the elderly and disabled. Doesn't it make sense that if a mother can kill a burdensome child, a child should be able to kill a burdensome parent?
John Locke and Thomas Jefferson put "life" first in the list of natural rights because without it you can't have liberty, property or pursuit of happiness. Our nation and many others in the world have lost sight of that extremely basic and logical point. If you can't rely upon government to defend the most basic rights, how can you expect it to honestly care for the poor, promote social justice, end the death penalty and be more responsible in its foreign policy decisions that affect the lives of citizens of other nations? The fact is you can't.
If you value your freedom and civil liberties and want to promote the ideals previously mentioned, vote for life from conception to natural death.
Wichgers is a junior history and philosophy major.
Click here to comment on this viewpoint on the Tribune Forum.