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.
You can choose who your charity goes to. I see it as an advantage that you need to maintain relationships or show that you are deserving of charity instead of having a guarantee that you get it no matter what type of person you are, or if you cheat the system.
Also, if so many people want universal healthcare, and the majority who oppose it are only against the means of doing it (forcing people to fund and provide it, but in favor of voluntary means), then that's more than enough.
Even better if everyone focuses on their own communities...the old thing about people sweeping their own doorstep and the world would be a cleaner place. Obviously that isn't limited to geography now with the internet, and with kickstarter-type campaigns.
I don't think anyone should be stuck in a relationship (marriage, parent/child, work) in order to keep their access to healthcare. What an archaic idea.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by newdixiegirl
Yes. Basic healthcare is a basic human right. Unbelievable that this is even debatable. I wonder how many who answer "no" consider themselves to be Christians.
Only in America...
There's often a vast difference between those who consider themselves 'Christ-like' and those who actually are.
Now see, there's the rub. We don't allow that kind of thing in most of this country.
If assisted euthanasia was allowed for anyone who wanted it and found a willing provider, I would take much less issue with how expensive healthcare is here. Because worst case scenario, people could make the choice to effectively and painlessly pass.
LOL you mean Dr Kevorkian?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25
A gentleman at my church.
He's married with two grown sons and four grandchildren. He and his wife just recently celebrated their 30th wedding anniversary. He became a quadriplegic following a work accident where he fell 40 feet in 1990. He still owns that business.
That's not the example that was directed at me, being on a ventilator and being a vegetable was. Either way if I didn't have the ability to enjoy my life which is far different than how he enjoys it, I'd still choose letting me croak. That isn't any kind of life having to depend on others to assist with every aspect of "life" no way. That's not living...
I have a hard time understanding how people see some kind of difference between private and public insurance, like wishing for one somehow categorizes you as a commie big government pansy or wishing for the other somehow magically transforms you into a rugged individualist while you get reamed up the backside. It's hard to enjoy liberty and freedom when you're mortgaging your home to pay for your wife's/child's/put-other-loved-one-here healthcare.
Americans have either never heard of the most important freedom you can have besides the your own, or they don't care...and that's economic freedom. Americans are slaves and many of you love yourselves for it.
It's about being principled. A lot of people don't understand that, clearly, or the importance of it. If you hold a fundamental principle, say "force is only acceptable to defend yourself and others, but you're in the wrong if you are the aggressor" or "it's wrong to take what belongs to someone else" or "rape is wrong" or anything where you put your foot down and say "never crossing that line"...you establish it and don't break it.
People who support public healthcare put the principle of "we must help everyone" over "it's wrong to steal" and "it's wrong to initiate force". I'm for helping people 100%, but not ahead of those principles.
That's how principles work. If rape is wrong (which I chose because we can all agree on that) you can't break that principle just because a huge percentage of people can't find dates and are sad and alone their whole lives. Yeah, it sucks that they're sad and we want to help, but we draw the line at force.
I hope people truly understand that, because that's literally the entire deal for me, and many others.
I don't think anyone should be stuck in a relationship (marriage, parent/child, work) in order to keep their access to healthcare. What an archaic idea.
A relationship meaning a binding contract or a voluntary association.
If you want out spell out tenets in the contract that allows you get out under certain circumstances.
No, I do not. I have no right to force the labor of others in order to satisfy my needs.
The only thing I have a "right to" is self-determination sans interference from others. That and the right to own property. That's as far as the concept of liberty or "rights" go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tb4000
Why would you not want to pay for others to be healthy allowing them to become productive members of society?
Because that is not my responsibility, neither legally nor morally--especially if we work under the (atheistic) assumption that there is no "higher power" and innate "moral code."
My brother preferred alcohol over his son and marriage.
You can't help a drunk unless he wants it. He was found dead in his condo on Valentine's Day 5 years ago and guess what? He stuck the bottle in his face and no one else did. He is to blame for his actions.
Alcoholism is an addiction. Certain people are hard wired to be addicts, through their physiology and psychology. Hard to beat addiction, not a personal "failing." Like certain people are wired to have certain mental illnesses or certain physical problems.
It's about being principled. A lot of people don't understand that, clearly, or the importance of it. If you hold a fundamental principle, say "force is only acceptable to defend yourself and others, but you're in the wrong if you are the aggressor" or "it's wrong to take what belongs to someone else" or "rape is wrong" or anything where you put your foot down and say "never crossing that line"...you establish it and don't break it.
People who support public healthcare put the principle of "we must help everyone" over "it's wrong to steal" and "it's wrong to initiate force". I'm for helping people 100%, but not ahead of those principles.
That's how principles work. If rape is wrong (which I chose because we can all agree on that) you can't break that principle just because a huge percentage of people can't find dates and are sad and alone their whole lives. Yeah, it sucks that they're sad and we want to help, but we draw the line at force.
I hope people truly understand that, because that's literally the entire deal for me, and many others.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E
It's about being principled. A lot of people don't understand that, clearly, or the importance of it. If you hold a fundamental principle, say "force is only acceptable to defend yourself and others, but you're in the wrong if you are the aggressor" or "it's wrong to take what belongs to someone else" or "rape is wrong" or anything where you put your foot down and say "never crossing that line"...you establish it and don't break it.
People who support public healthcare put the principle of "we must help everyone" over "it's wrong to steal" and "it's wrong to initiate force". I'm for helping people 100%, but not ahead of those principles.
That's how principles work. If rape is wrong (which I chose because we can all agree on that) you can't break that principle just because a huge percentage of people can't find dates and are sad and alone their whole lives. Yeah, it sucks that they're sad and we want to help, but we draw the line at force.
I hope people truly understand that, because that's literally the entire deal for me, and many others.
And just how 'principled' is it that a joint replacement appliance may well sell for 10X as many $$$ in the US as in many other countries? How principled is it hat Congress won't allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices? What reason is there to believe that 'principle' is a guiding light of the US healthcare industry? Principle may be all well and good but when an industry is unfettered by it, why should we expect a 'principled' result?
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.
