MondayâÄôs letter to the editor âÄúThe ideology of health care,âÄù addresses the morals that surround this heated health care debate. This article states that âÄúto steal from one individual for anotherâÄôs gain is both illegal and immoral.âÄù However, I think the moral standpoint concerning welfare of human beings also needs to be addressed. It can be argued that it is not fair the wealthy are being taxed to provide health care to the poor and uninsured. But is it fair that some people are born into having health insurance, never having to worry about being able to afford medical expenses? Is it fair that others have to choose between buying groceries and buying private health insurance? The assault on personal liberty this article addresses affects the elite and privileged part of our nation. What about the liberty of the rest of our society? By denying health care to those with pre-existing conditions, private insurance companies are getting away with a different kind of assault on personal liberty. Human rights do not just involve financial infringement. The basis of human rights is equal access to progression. If the nation continues to provide health care only to those privileged few, the rest of society will continue to be at an unfair disadvantage. Medical malpractice reform and effective insurance competition can only come about from a government public health insurance option. If citizens are guaranteed access to public programs such as education and the safety of police forces, why should so many be denied the right to live without illness? When it comes down to it, the health care debate has surfaced the question: Why is money continually more important than helping one another? Rachel Hersman University undergraduate student Please send comments to [email protected].