In The New York Times online article about the health care law, they interviewed a woman who was protesting from Seattle. She claimed that her job had given her health insurance. She remarked that since the government was so inefficient and wasteful, why should we allow the government to control our health care? She also stated that if the Affordable Care Act was to stand and not deemed unconstitutional that she would drop her health insurance for the principle of the thing. She stated that she would not trade her health for her freedom.
Why does she not drop it now? If the law is not deemed unconstitutional then there will be penalties starting in 2014. She could wait until the courts decide the constitutionaliy of the law or she could just drop the health insurance that she currently has. The law is passed. If your argument is that you will not have health insurance because you do not want the government to mandate that you have to have health insurance then you should not have health insurance now because the law is passed. The law isn't where it is going to be but the principality part of your argument is false.
So drop your health insurance. The government has already interfered. Your health has already compromised your freedom.
The question should have been asked to the woman, why do you continue to have health insurance then?