Interesting Comparison

Then and now

 

Interesting perspective in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette editorial (Perspective, please) on 2/6/09 regarding Dr. Dan Hawkins’ appointment to the governor’s Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Advisory Committee and his idea that lawmakers can possibly be held criminally and civilly liable for “pro-tobacco (pro-death for profit) votes injurious to the public health”. More interesting still is the reference to the post-WWII Nuremberg trials of the Nazis without reference to the Nuremberg Code of Medical Ethics, which came as a result of the findings of these trials and the horrific medical experiments conducted on unwilling human subjects.

Could it be possible, then, that such lawmakers who can be held accountable for such “pro-death” legislation as allowing tobacco consumption can then be expected to answer, both criminally and civilly, for pro-abortion legislation, up to and including President Obama’s recent executive order that essentially puts the US government in the unique position of financing and exporting this particular mode of death internationally?

A comparison to Carrie Nation “busting up a saloon” is not fair. Government revenue for a new spending program in the midst of a massive recession that is getting worse by the day was not at stake. The ideal and goal was the prohibition of alcohol consumption, not new or additional taxes to finance new and expanded programs while “hoping” people stop drinking. That movement was not talking out of both sides of the proverbial mouth. Arkansas legislators and the governor are.