Are We Ready To Fund Truly Pro-Life Policies?

At the very least, we should inflict no harm.

According to an article in the July 24 issue of TIME magazine, "The United Patients of America", many Americans are increasingly conflicted in the current debate over healthcare.

An example is that of Alison Chandra, a pediatric nurse who has a three-year-old son with heterotaxy, an extremely rare condition in which he was born with multiple heart defects, two left lungs and five spleens.

According to the article, while Alison and her son are currently covered by her husband's employee health plan, the likely return of lifetime caps under any proposed replacement of Obamacare would make their child virtually uninsurable. His care has already cost nearly $2 million, and their son's future prospects are grim at best, but without health insurance coverage there would be little hope for him.

Chandra, who is strongly pro-life, laments, "Those who would have crucified me for aborting my child now want to make it impossible for me to keep him alive."

Herein lies the dilemma. With ever more advances in means of saving the lives of those who in the past would have had no chance of survival, who will pay the astronomical costs for their treatment?

For me, the answer is simple. Let's make deep cuts in our spending on massive means of military destruction and reinvest that money in saving all of the precious lives we can.