Hillarycare and ELCA

I used to be a Democrat, and voted for Bill Clinton.  I left the reservation in 2000, and some of my ire was at Hillary for her universal health care plan, when she was FLOTUS, and some was at her philandering husband.  I retired that year from OSU and no longer had to worry about being a Democrat with conservative values. But a 1993 letter shows the worm was turning much earlier.

While cleaning yesterday I came across a  November1993 letter I'd written to The Lutheran, organ of ELCA, the largest Lutheran synod in the U.S.  At the time I didn't know ELCA's position on abortion (anytime for any reason), or I may have left our church.  The magazine had carried a "Special Report: Health Care," and it seems to be written by Lawrence O'Connell S.T.D.  The initials aren't for sexually transmitted diseases, but doctorate in sacred theology. That said, it's HillaryCare. I don't know who gave him that degree, but I give him an F for ethics, after going on-line and checking out various boards, committee, and positions he's held.

The heart of my letter (ELCA didn't respond nor did O'Connell) : "Instead of placing personal responsibility for good health as first, the task force put it number 13.  We would not have a need for such a document or billions spent on health care if it were not for abuse of alcohol, cigarettes, food and sexual behavior.  Once those health problems, all of which are personally manageable, are set aside, we can afford the rest with pocket change."

I go on to ask how is it ethical for O'Connell to decide I should pay the social and economic costs of someone else's abortion, drunk driving, obesity, STDs or even failure to floss?  where is the justice in "redistributing" our resources? Hasn't socialism, which is what "redistribution" and "communal sharing of risks" means, shown itself to be a complete failure in Eastern Europe and the USSR?"