Letter: Opposition to Obamacare not treason
In response to a Letter to the Editor by Chris Cantele dated Aug. 14:
I courteously disagree on virtually every one of Mr. Cantele's arguments though space does not permit a full analysis and response. Let me, then, consider the most important areas of disagreement:
• Implicit in his letter is the critically important question of the proper role of government. Are governments intended to provide for all the material needs of the people? Are they primarily intended for the defense of the people against aggressors? These are all reasonable propositions. I submit, however, that the proper and fundamental role of government is to provide the environment in which people can live their lives in freedom.
• With this in mind I consider the Affordable Care Act completely inconsistent with the proper role of government because it represents a significant barrier to personal freedom. It will consume yet more of the national wealth; it will impose its own version of health care decisions on the people; even prior to full implementation, it has already shown it's unresponsive to the religious values of a significant proportion of the population.
• While I can understand Mr. Cantele’s concern for his fiancée, I suggest it a bit of a stretch to call opposition to this program treason. Treason is the giving over of one’s country to an enemy. Opposing certain legislation or calling for changes in public policy do not represent treasonous actions or intent.
Finally, I would remind Mr. Cantele that all members of Congress enjoy the privileges of office. These privileges are not party specific. Perhaps a discussion of term limits should follow.
Michael Kerner, Lisle