Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No they are not, and never will be a part of our natural rights.
There are no such things as "natural rights.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
You are saying that government mandated benevolence thru legislative coercion is a constitutional right, and that is absurd.
I said nothing close. I said that we as a society make moral choices. The government doesn't necessarily have anything to do with other than operationalizing those choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
The simplest test to determine is something is a Constitution or natural right, is whether or not it requires that someone else must give up something of theirs in order for you to acquire that right.
See? There you go... you have just proved that there are no such thing as natural rights. The very reason we have invented morality and then endeavored to codify it into laws is that what some people hallucinate are "natural rights" always and inevitably conflict. There is are no "rights" that do not eventually come into conflict, requiring somebody to surrender theirs in order for you to have yours.
We'll ignore that you have argued here in a circle, assuming (with no justification) that the right to property of any sort exists "naturally." It does only to the extent that "property" can be taken by force. And with that simple truth, even the underpinning assumptions of your philosophical position collapse into ash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
If, in order for you to obtain your right, you require the power of government to confiscate property, income, compensation or another person must be coerced to perform some action, or someone else's rights must be infringed upon in order to give you your "right"… then it is not a right.
In order for me to obtain my "right" we must first decide as a people that it is a right in the first place. Once we have reached that consensus, we absolutely utilize the coercive power of government to enforce those rights. This is the only reason we have laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
What good is free health care if I starve to death from lack of food, or freeze to death from lack of a warm, dry house??
Nobody has proposed free health care. There is no such thing as free health care. At this point, your desperate pursuit of red herring has taken you so far off the track that you not even trying to make much sense.
That said, healthcare, food, shelter... all those things are better if they all were present at the same time. All of them are diminished by any of them being absent. By introducing all sorts of additional complexity you do not change the fundamental issue one whit. You only obfuscate the bankruptcy of your own position... though few people are fooled.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
We ask our government to provide social welfare programs to take care of the poor and destitute, not because we are fulfilling their natural god given rights, we do it because it's the moral and ethical thing to do for someone down on their luck or suffering from a harsh situation in their life.
Exactly as I said. It is a moral choice, not a grumpkin, boojum, snark or "natural god given right."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
When I donate food to my local food pantry, the Salvation Army, or local homeless shelter, I'm not doing it to provide someone with their basic human rights, I'm doing it out of compassion for my neighbor, who is suffering hard times and is in need of my assistance.
Forgive me for chuckling at the absurd image of you donating anything to anybody. Such an act has never appeared particularly congenial to your character.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha
If food or medical insurance/care were a human right, then no one would pay for it, all those doctors would provide it all for free. Don't you get it, if health care were a right there would not be such a thing as health care insurance at all.
At this point, nothing you are writing makes sense. No... it does not follow that rights are determined by whether or not we pay for them. You are supposedly an adherent of "natural rights."
How much does a lion pay for the zebra it eats?
Last edited by HistorianDude; 11-11-2013 at 07:19 AM..
Healthcare should be a right, but health insurance shouldn't be required to provide it. Health insurance is suppose to be there to cover things like unforeseen emergency room visits, not annual checkups at the doctor's office.
Decouple health insurance from healthcare and both would suddenly become affordable and useful.
Healthcare should be a right, but health insurance shouldn't be required to provide it. Health insurance is suppose to be there to cover things like unforeseen emergency room visits, not annual checkups at the doctor's office.
Decouple health insurance from healthcare and both would suddenly become affordable and useful.
All these arguments about healthcare in America seem to boil down to: "Yeah, a single payer system would be better...buh-buh-butt so-shul-ism!"
Yet no other civilized country in the world would exchange their "socialist" healthcare systems for our previous "profits over people" one.
Because to people these days EVERTHING they want to do is a "right". Healthcare, that must be constitutional amendment number XXXI or something. Goes to show you if you are illiterate about the constitution and its amendments as well as your state constitution and laws, you will believe anything. Taking care of the health of those who cannot afford it may be a moral obligation (our society's moral compass is so screwed up and subject to the whims of all) but it is NOT a right.
Healthcare, that must be constitutional amendment number XXXI or something.
What would lead you to hallucinate that for something to become a "right" it requires Constitutional acknowledgment? The Constitution itself calls bullsh*t on such a claim.
Quote:
The 9th Amendement
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
What would lead you to hallucinate that for something to become a "right" it requires Constitutional acknowledgment? The Constitution itself calls bullsh*t on such a claim.
Yes. If you don't want to accept the risk of catching a cold that has gone along with daily life for the entirety of human existence, then that's your problem. It doesn't give you the authority to force everyone else to pay your bills for you. Take some responsibility for yourself.
Just out of curiosity...what if you were born with an illness that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat on the 'free market'. It's a rare disorder, so volume and competition will never bring the price down, but it is chronic and will need treatment for life. With treatment, you can live a relatively happy and productive life, but without it you will slowly get sicker and sicker.
What then? And what about cancer? Do we have the obligation as a society to take care of our weakest members? Or should the amount of money you make determine whether you should live or die?
No , never said YOU were. I am always careful not to directly accuse the poster, cause I do not know him or her, that would be unfair. Now , when you make statements like you did you are getting very close. What do you think we should do ? If you or anyone else signs on to the far Right Tea Party crap , and speaks out/ supports it as if they were the Tea Party themselves., what are we to think. Stand and deliver, show your colors so the whole world will know. Thats the honorable thing to do.
LOL you may not have called him out by name, but it's obvious what you were saying, and it was directed at him, so stop playing dumb.
Who knows what you think the TEA party crap is, since people of your ilk have endless straw man arguments for everything under the sun, and they all have the label "Tea Party" on them. Pretty much, whatever opposing view the left doesn't agree with, from gay marriage, abortion, immigration, terrorism, to global warming, it's all Tea Party crap.
Just out of curiosity...what if you were born with an illness that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat on the 'free market'. It's a rare disorder, so volume and competition will never bring the price down, but it is chronic and will need treatment for life. With treatment, you can live a relatively happy and productive life, but without it you will slowly get sicker and sicker.
What then? And what about cancer? Do we have the obligation as a society to take care of our weakest members? Or should the amount of money you make determine whether you should live or die?
We try to offer help to them as a society, not because we are mandated by law to fulfill their constitutional right to subsidized health care, but because we are a compassionate society.
Charity for those in need has always been something we as a society have engaged in, not because it was our laws forced us to do it.
TRANSLATION: You refuse to acknowledge anything but your own biased opinions, so you project that flaw onto others????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
