Should Insurance companies deny you insurance if youre gay? - Page 7 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Western Otto · #91 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd93

Oh, so I haven't researched it? That shows how much you know about me, precisely nothing, but keep on mis-labeling my views and facts, and mis-characterizing the things that I say, it just makes me look better. You have no idea of the extensive research that I've done, and I have yet to find any substantial evidence that humans can cause global warming.

Not sure where you get the demagogue idea, but it's obviously a false statement.

It's funny, but your posts don't reflect the research you've done. Do you know about the Tuvalu Islands? How about the new islands off the coast of Greenland? The cessation of Gulf Stream flow for 10 days at the end of last year?

I got the demagogue statement from your signature line. In the dictionary under "demagogue" they have Rush Limbaugh's picture.

Western Otto · #92 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd93

I have indeed read the posts by Kinetic, Swoop, and Thane. Here's an idea, don't worry about how much I read, it's obviously way more than you think, I keep knocking you down in this arena with my facts and proof, but please keep getting back up, this is fun. I have yet to see any fear based arguements against gay marriage. I've seen facts about the abomination that it is, but no fear.

Okay, so it isn't that you haven't seen the fear-based pieces, but rather that you agree with them and the fear so you accept them. Lack of education often allows people to be taken in by this kind of fear-mongering. Read some real science--preferably from this century.

pramjockey · #93 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

JHC, that's why I personally would like to see some sort of single-payer system. As someone who's worked in healthcare, I know how easy it is to fall through the cracks. Unfortunately, what happens when you hit bottom is you end up costing the system much more than if you were insured with some sort of preventative care plan to begin with.

We as a society need to make a decision. Is health care a right? If it's not, then hospitals need to turn away the poor at the door, emergency or not, and let them die in the streets. If so, then we need to completely redo our approach.

Western Otto · #94 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd93

That's odd, I see it as the other way around. I've stated facts about it and how it's detestable in the sight of God, and I've never looked like a buffoon. Actually the "looking like a buffoon" comes from blind acceptance and adhereance to a religious dogma for which you have no proof but yet you want all of us to believe it and live it because YOU think it's right. By definition that is buffoonery.

Ok, but when you're married it is done before the eyes of God, he is there weather you believe in him or not, he's there. You don't speak for God and there is nothing to show that your Holy Book speaks for God either--and there is much to show that it doesn't speak for God. Get a copy of the X-Rated Bible and check out what's REALLY in the Bible. Don't take my word for it, get a copy of the book and sit down with your favorite version of the Bible and check the scriptural references. Part of the Buffoonery of the Christian's position vis a vis the Bible is that most of them don't know anything about the history of their own Holy Book--but they should before they go out and try to force everybody to behave according to their personal interpretation of it.

I'm always respectful. Passing laws to FORCE other people to live by your interpretation of laws written in an old book is, by definition disrespectful.

You're very good at getting group persecution started here. I think that's more disrespectful than any Christian. Of course you'll post something about how small radical Christian groups have said something and lump us all in with them, yet more forms of persecution. It's ok, I can take it, it doesn't bother me, The LORD God said: Meaning I am all that my people need me to be.
Do you not post things about crazy gay people and then lump all gay people in with them so that you can justify your religious bigotry and hate?

Now that is just plain false, I've never been "paralysed" as you say with fear about anything. I can and have proven everything I say, and people like you decide to join in in group persecution. Just because you yourself are afraid of God.

Denying fear is one of the most common ways for people to deal with their fears. It takes courage to admit and face one's fears--where there is no fear there is no courage.

Obviously I don't fear God enough or I would be cringing in Church with the rest of you, wouldn't I? In all of your research have you ever catalogued how many times God demands that people fear Him in the Bible? I bet not.

JHC · #95 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by pramjockey

JHC, that's why I personally would like to see some sort of single-payer system. As someone who's worked in healthcare, I know how easy it is to fall through the cracks. Unfortunately, what happens when you hit bottom is you end up costing the system much more than if you were insured with some sort of preventative care plan to begin with.

We as a society need to make a decision. Is health care a right? If it's not, then hospitals need to turn away the poor at the door, emergency or not, and let them die in the streets. If so, then we need to completely redo our approach.

I agree.

It doesn't really matter what we think of someones behavior in regard to health insurance. Being homosexually inclined does not necessarily make a person less responsible than heterosexual. We may think smokers are idiots and then hop in our car and drive 60 mph through a school zone.

The greater question, (and real question), is as you've stated; do we want health care to be a general responsibility/benefit of society or an individual responsibility?

In making this decision, again, we don't need to consider such emotional charged topics as individual behavior, we only need to behave like the insurance companies or consumers; assess the risk and cost, assess the benefit, check your wallet, make the decision.

todd93 · #96 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by pramjockey

from Merriam-Webster Online

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Atheism is completely different from agnosticism.

Right, they're both disbelief., so they're not "completely"different as you so inaccurately put it.

todd93 · #97 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Western Otto

Denying fear is one of the most common ways for people to deal with their fears. It takes courage to admit and face one's fears--where there is no fear there is no courage.

Maybe in your world, mate, in mine, I have no fears, especially with God at my side and in my heart. What on earth is there for me to be afraid of?

Quote:

Obviously I don't fear God enough or I would be cringing in Church with the rest of you, wouldn't I? In all of your research have you ever catalogued how many times God demands that people fear Him in the Bible? I bet not.

A bet you'll lose no doubt. I love it how you "Anti-Christians" try to make something out of nothing. Do you know what the meaning of the word "fear" even is in biblical terms. I doubt it.

todd93 · #98 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Western Otto

Okay, so it isn't that you haven't seen the fear-based pieces, but rather that you agree with them and the fear so you accept them. Lack of education often allows people to be taken in by this kind of fear-mongering. Read some real science--preferably from this century.

Wow, a mindless baseless, factless personal attack. What a surprising display of Liberalism. Keep it up.

pramjockey · #99 (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHC

I agree.

It doesn't really matter what we think of someones behavior in regard to health insurance. Being homosexually inclined does not necessarily make a person less responsible than heterosexual. We may think smokers are idiots and then hop in our car and drive 60 mph through a school zone.

The greater question, (and real question), is as you've stated; do we want health care to be a general responsibility/benefit of society or an individual responsibility?

In making this decision, again, we don't need to consider such emotional charged topics as individual behavior, we only need to behave like the insurance companies or consumers; assess the risk and cost, assess the benefit, check your wallet, make the decision.

As a bleeding-heart liberal, my inclination, of course, is away from the assessing risk/cost and benefit direction. I have a hard time with putting a monetary value on human life or human suffering. However, I fear that this is the direction we're headed. As people slip from insured to uninsured, their primary care becomes emergency care. I remember a study in which it was demonstrated that primary care is ultimately less expensive - it's more expensive to make people wait until they're ill enough to go to the ER than it is to give them preventative care.

IMHO, the cost of providing emergency care to the uninsured is one of the things that is crippling the healthcare system. Of course, I also struggle with it being a for-profit system; I believe that a not-for-profit system would provide better care for less money.

In any case, I truly fear a society where we exclude gays, blacks, or whomever from being covered.

pramjockey · #**100** (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by todd93

Right, they're both disbelief., so they're not "completely"different as you so inaccurately put it.

Last deviation from the topic. An atheist is sure that there is no god. An agnostic is not sure one way or the other, and believes that it can't be proven either way. Often it's a question of god being too big to really comprehend.

Certainty is not the same thing as doubt.

SMadsen · #**101** (**permalink**) 01-23-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Last deviation from the topic. An atheist is sure that there is no god. An agnostic is not sure one way or the other, and believes that it can't be proven either way. Often it's a question of god being too big to really comprehend.

Often, for agnosticism, it's not a question of a god being too big to comprehend but a very simple question of there being no way to determine the existence of deities. That's a very different thing than comprehension and has nothing to do with how big, complex, small or simple the deity is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pramjockey

Certainty is not the same thing as doubt.

Very true. It has often nothing at all to do with doubt. For example, I have no doubt that each and every deity the human mind has ever conceived of exists nowhere else than where the conception takes place: In the human mind. But I have as few methods to determine it as he who conceives the deity has to determine the opposite: None.