Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare ~ By Chuck Norris

By Chuck Norris August 10, 2009 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 Health care reforms are turning into health care revolts. Americans are turning up the heat on congressmen in town hall meetings across the U.S., who apparently hoped that citizens would simply swallow the hook of Obamacare. It's unfortunate that rather than respecting and welcoming citizens' questions and grievances, many of our national leaders are belittling, demonizing and marginalizing them as extremists. They refuse to believe these groups represent any real grass roots resistance. Instead, they concoct conspiracy theories that they are conservatives who are secretly mobilizing these irrational marches. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said that protesters of Obamacare are "carrying Swastikas." Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused the protesters of trying to "sabotage" the democratic process. And Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., responded that "well-dressed" protesters are out to "hurt our president." So who are the real extremists – citizens who voice their First Amendment grievances or politicians who through their rhetoric try socially to quarantine citizens and impede democratic debate? While watching these political hot August nights, I decided to research the reasons why so many are so opposed to Obamacare – to separate facts from fantasy. What I discovered was that there are indeed dirty little secrets buried deep within the 1,000-plus page proposed health care bill. Having already given "Six reasons Obamacare is bad medicine" for America in a previous column, I thought through August I'd expose the political syringes through which it will be injected into the veins of America if Obamacare passes. Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care development. It's outlined in passages like Section 440 and Section 1904 of the House bill (page 838) under the heading: "Home visitation programs for families with young children and families expecting children," which would provide (via grants to states) for home visitation programs to educate parents on child behavior and parenting skills. Home visitation programs? Sounds so quaint!? You mean, for parents endangering their children or for those who want to better their parenting skills? If it's for those who endanger their children, we already have a government agency for that – Child Protective Services. And if it's merely for family education, most communities have a plethora of help there through local and state agencies and schools, outside of that other government vassal – Planned Parenthood. So do we need another federal bureaucracy for training parents and families? Or is there a hidden agenda in that vague outline? The bill says that the government agents, the "well-trained and competent staff," will "provide parents with knowledge of age-appropriate child development in cognitive language, social, emotional and motor domains … modeling, consulting, and coaching on parenting practices, skills to interact with their child to enhance age-appropriate development." Are you kidding me?! And with whose parental principles and values? Their own? Certain experts? Who? From what field and theory of childhood development? As if there are one-size-fits-all parenting techniques? Do we really believe they will contextualize and personalize every form of parenting in their education or merely universally indoctrinate with their own? Are we to assume the State's mediators will understand every parent's social or religious core values on parenting? Or will they teach some secular-progressive and religiously neutered version of parental values and wisdom? And when they "consult and coach" those who are expecting babies, will they ever decide circumstances are not beneficial for the child and encourage abortion? [READ COMPLETE COLUMN]