Kenneth Pike was recently admitted to Strong Memorial Hospital in Rochester to assess his compatibility for a life-saving heart transplant. If approved, Pike will undergo a procedure that will give him a new lease of life at a cost of approximately $800,000.

Why do I mention the cost? Because once he recovers from the surgery, Pike will be sent back to a New York State prison where he is serving an 18-40 year sentence for sexually assaulting a relative. The $800,000 plus tab for the surgery meanwhile, will be sent to the taxpayers.

That leaves the obvious question: Should your tax dollars be used to give a new heart to a convicted rapist? Furthermore, should a healthy heart be "wasted" on someone who committed both rape and incest, while the waiting list for those in need of a heart transplant in both this state, and the country grows daily?

My initial reaction to the Pike story was, are you kidding me? If you have a heart, give it to the father with a wife and kids at home who may not live to see another Christmas with his family. Give it to a young person with their entire life ahead of them — a life that doesn't include "convicted rapist" on their resume. Give it to anyone, but don't give it to this guy. According to current data, there are 3,147 patients nationwide waiting for a new heart. In my mind, Kenneth Pike should sit at 3,148 on that list. Or should he?

I shared this story with several people over the weekend, and it was one conversation in particular that swayed my opinion (somewhat) on the Pike debate. "Who are you, or I, or the State of New York, to play God?" a friend asked me. Asked to explain, she went on to point out that Pike committed a crime, was sentenced to prison, and is, "serving his time." He is in essence, a ward of the State, and as such, he is entitled to regular doctor's visits, dental care and medical treatment that would be afforded to any of us.

While I viewed a heart transplant as optional, it is of course, quite vital to his survival. She then posed the question: If the state didn't pursue a transplant, would they not be in effect arbitrarily increasing Pike's sentence from 18-40 to death?

Furthermore, would the debate (in my mind st least) be as passionate if Pike was convicted of insider trading, or embezzlement? How much of the public anger over footing the bill for the transplant comes from the fact that we are talking about a rapist? For me, the answer is, a lot.

More though, the point is the one broached by my friend during our Sunday afternoon discussion. Who are we to play God? If we begin to deny medical treatment to prisoners for "major surgeries" where does it stop? Soon some politician realizes we can slash the budget by cutting non-essential doctor's visits, then we eliminate dental care. Before you know it, the prison system backslides closer to something we are used to reading about in a war-torn third-world dictatorships half a world away.

In our country founded and cultivated as the greatest democracy in the world, Pike was convicted by his peers and given a sentence. Until he walks out of prison, the government has an obligation to provide him with medical care, no matter what the cost. You may not like it ... I may not like it, but the laws and principles that guarantee his care in the prison system are the same ones that guarantee the freedoms each of us enjoy every day.