What is the Role of the Government in Individual Choice?

There is an emotionally charged debate that has been going on in this country, probably since abortion became a medically viable option.  It moved from a local and state issue to the national level with the 1973 landmark decision in Roe versus Wade.  Today, advocates for a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy for convenience say any candidate who expresses a personal choice in favor of carrying a viable fetus to term is “at war against women” (see Emily's List).  

In Roe v. Wade, and reaffirmed by a narrow 5-4 decision in “Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey” the court finds that the decision on abortion rests with the doctor and patient in the first trimester, but continues to allow the state to set conditions after that, as long as it does not place undue burden on the woman seeking an abortion. To me, if you put the individual moral discussion aside for a moment, it boils down to the question “What is the role of government regarding individual choice?” 

Is it the right of the government to oversee every decision a man or woman makes with their life?  The pro-choice individuals I’ve discussed this with almost universally argue along the lines of “No politician has the right to tell me what I can or can not do with my body!”  If that is the central issue then why it is necessary to use federal funds to pay for abortion?  If you don’t want politicians involved in a personal decision then why open the door at all for them by asking for their wallet?  As in other interactions when one person controls the financial position of another they invariably believe they have the right to tell the dependent what they should or should not do.  This really seems to be the kicker in this debate.  It’s really not about the right of an individual to make a choice but the expectation the federal government must fund it.

If there is an expectation that individual choice must be funded by tax dollars how can you not assume even a supportive politician (or a nameless government official) won’t find a way to tell you how you must behave?  The debate on a woman’s right to choose is only clouded by those who believe the government must fund abortion on demand; for me it seems a very small step from one woman’s expectation, to abortion decision making by committee.  For those who would say this couldn’t possibly happen I ask only that you look back to the 1930’s to 50’s when the decision to perform lobotomies was given to parents and the state.  We have seen the government experiment with sterilization of mental patients, and use citizens from other countries (US apologizes for experiment) to test the effects of STD so don’t for one minute believe we are not capable of deciding to control the population through forced abortion. Too “old school?” How about 1965 when the DoD used human subjects to test measure how much VX nerve agent the rubber clothing and gas masks could stand, or when the DoD sprayed Bacillus globigii on Oahu to simulate an attack on an island complex.  There are more recent examples but I only did a 1-minute internet search.

I am pretty sure the next issue would be what about those women who can’t afford the medical procedure?  Isn't this the right place for those pro-abortion groups to spend their money, rather than on the lobbyists?  Should poverty be a justification for the government to control a personal decision any more than with the rich?

Bottom line:  If you want the right to control your own body, then the last thing you should do is allow the Federal Government to be a part by demanding they fund that decision?

P.S.  If I wasn't so simple I would probably consider the real issue for most of these women's groups is how many dollars they can get from the federal government to pay for their existence, but that would be just wrong and they are far too altruistic for that.