|
A So-Called Debate
on Hepatitis C
Dear Editor,
Re: "What should we do about compensating hepatitis-C victims?" -- a "debate"
between Rino A. Stradiotto and Maurice McGregor -- May 15 -- Globe and Mail
A typical Globe and Mail debate -- this time on the hepatitis-C "victims."
Instead of debating whether it is unjust to force individual Canadians to pay for
problems they were not personally responsible for, the debate is over how much compensation
and by what means -- direct payment (Mr. McGregor) or via the "social safety
net" (Mr. Stradiotto). Once the principle that someone's need, pain, mal treatment
or misfortune is an automatic claim on everyone else's life is adopted -- the basic
principle underlying socialism -- it's only a matter of time before we have a impoverished
society of whining victims rather than a prosperous society of predominantly ambitious,
responsible, productive, happy individuals. Now prisoners want Canadians to pay for
their reckless actions with needles. Once the principle of justice gets perverted
or inverted the unjust consume the just.
Sincerely,
Glenn Woiceshyn
Hepatitis C and
the Reform Party
Dear Editor,
Re: "Reason Over Passion" -- editorial -- May 28 -- The Ottawa Citizen.
Kudos for your editorial chastising the Reform Party for trying to wrestle the bleeding-heart
title away from the Liberals regarding the hepatitis C fiasco.
We were led to believe that Reform stood for reason over emotion, principles over
expediency, justice, fiscal restraint, personal responsibility and individual rights
-- but it obviously does not. To punish individuals for harm to others which they
themselves were not responsible for is irrational and unjust -- and certainly not
"compassionate." Life entails risk and human beings are not omniscient.
If some people suffer through no objective fault of anyone then the proper form of
"compensation" is voluntary charity.
Forcibly sacrificing individuals to someone's need or misfortune is the basic principle
underlying socialism -- which we thought Reform opposed. Who will take Reform serious
now when they criticize the Liberals for their big-spending, socialistic policies?
Who will stop other "victims" from punishing us for their misfortune? On
this one issue Reform has handed the Liberals a green light to expand the welfare
state and further destroy our individual rights and prosperity. Reform has revealed
itself to be just another party of unpredictable pragmatists eschewing principles
in the name of getting votes.
Properly, the government had no business in blood. The government's proper function
is to protect individual rights. Blood should be a private commodity. Anyone who
is objectively harmed by suppliers should seek compensation directly from the suppliers,
or take them to court. This places responsibility where it belongs -- with individuals
-- and provides an incentive to be responsible. The socialist policy of spreading
the punishment to everyone merely destroys that incentive. What else could explain
the hordes of irresponsible people in our society today -- demanding compensation
from those who are responsible?
Sincerely,
Glenn Woiceshyn
© 1998 Glenn Woiceshyn.
All rights reserved. This article can be found on-line at at http://www.capitalism.org/glennw. |
|
