Thread: Is Life A Right?

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Adaher!

me friend, i don't think it makes ye a slave.

it makes ye thar countryman, thar brother...thar kin. it means ye believe in somethin' more than just yerself, but a bigger community whar a risin' tide indeed does lift all boats.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Things like health care are an economic benefit of citizenship in a particular nation. We pay dues(taxes) and those are used to fund a variety of priorities.

But no one can have a right to the people's economic output. Those economic fruits belong to the people, and if the people choose not to fund health care, health care won't be funded. Perhaps the people would rather fund more education, or send a man to Saturn, or build the world's largest amusement park.

Even in a democracy, rights can't be taken away. But health care can, as can any other spending item. Congress has absolute power to spend however they want, which means that by simple majority vote, they can take all health care dollars and use them for other purposes.

Originally Posted by John Drake

There are, apparently, quite a few board members who believe sick people who cannot pay for health care that could save them should just quietly die and leave the rest of us alone.

I know of no one on the forum who advocates for this straw man. As usually, when someone on the left has no argument they resort to straw man and ad hominem attacks.

Very few of them want to phrase it exactly that way, of course, but I can see no alternative given the opinions they've expressed.

So let's phrase and discuss it that way. Say someone walks into a hospital and he's very obviously having a heart attack. He becomes unconscious.

He will receive treatment and care. It does not matter if he is a homeless man strung out on drugs with a hang nail, he will receive treatment if he walks into an emergency room. Personally I would advocate for refusing people who attempt to use emergency rooms for non-emergencies. There are free clinics both government and private charity for non-emergencies.

The rest of your post is crap and unworthy of my attention.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Sadanie

I agree in principle with you.

So you accept the baseless principle that conservatives just want people to die?

This is such garbage, especially when you consider the facts. Conservatives have a problem with government control of health care, which is what Obama Care will lead to if it is allowed to go forward. Conservatives also question the wisdom of making health care a line item on the government budget.

First off, medical care is not a right. Rights, as they are outlined in the U.S. Constitution, do not require the infringement on the property or time of others. The only rights listed in the Bill of Rights that require government to do something, like provide legal council in criminal cases, are put in place because the government is attempting to adjudicate the taking away of life, liberty, or property of an individual. All of the other rights listed in the Bill of Rights place limitations on government. My right of the freedom of speech does not take away your right to the same freedom. My right to bare arms does not infringe on your right to bare arms. But if you make medical care a right that requires the taking of the property and time of others without just compensation or due process.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Moonglow

nice quote. Makes you wonder how many anti-right to healthcare people go to church on Sunday and worship to a God that has ordained that as humans they share in the collective society of good will, love and respect for their fellow humans. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, is not just a hollow representation of an idea to the universal suffarage of caring about about humans and that includes medical care.

:rolleyes: Baseless crap. Every study about charity shows that conservatives give more of their own money than liberals. The same is seen when you compare Europe and America. Private giving is higher here than in Europe. Liberals are more than ready and willing to give ‘other peoples’ money,’ through government programs or entitlements, but when it comes to giving their own money, not so much.

Snip.

As a community we need to see that all citizens have the availabilty of medical care, to make for a more healthier society,

All citizens do have excess to medical care. No one is turned away.

not turn our backs on those in need.

Then put your money where your mouth is an give to those in need rather than attempt to force others to give.

Give unto Caesar what is Caesers', and give unto God, that which is Gods'.

:rolleyes: Wrong quote. Jesus did not say give the government your coat so it can allocate pants and shoes to those it deems worth of its largess.

to God we owe that the gifts given by him are given by use to those that are in need, this is his planet and his creation of humans, to deny anything because of greed and hard hearts is denying the will of God.

If you truly hold this belief then you need to direct it at the liberal-Progressives who refrain from giving with their own money. Regarding both the Hebrew and the Christian faiths the Commandments and the teachings direct followers to engage in private charity and personal giving. Neither faith holds the ideal of giving through government or relying on government largess for those in need.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

So you accept the baseless principle that conservatives just want people to die?

This is such garbage, especially when you consider the facts. Conservatives have a problem with government control of health care, which is what Obama Care will lead to if it is allowed to go forward. Conservatives also question the wisdom of making health care a line item on the government budget.

First off, medical care is not a right. Rights, as they are outlined in the U.S. Constitution, do not require the infringement on the property or time of others. The only rights listed in the Bill of Rights that require government to do something, like provide legal council in criminal cases, are put in place because the government is attempting to adjudicate the taking away of life, liberty, or property of an individual. All of the other rights listed in the Bill of Rights place limitations on government. My right of the freedom of speech does not take away your right to the same freedom. My right to bare arms does not infringe on your right to bare arms. But if you make medical care a right that requires the taking of the property and time of others without just compensation or due process.

tashi deleks,

M

My right to affordable health care doesn't take your right to affordable health care away!
Look at the per capita cost of providing health care to EVERYONE in European countries. . .and it is much lower than the per capita cost of providing health care to SOME in the U.S.. . .so providing health care to some is actually taking MORE from us than a system that involves providing health care to all would.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

My right to affordable health care doesn't take your right to affordable health care away!
Look at the per capita cost of providing health care to EVERYONE in European countries. . .and it is much lower than the per capita cost of providing health care to SOME in the U.S.. . .so providing health care to some is actually taking MORE from us than a system that involves providing health care to all would.

You missed the whole point of his statement. The pert in bold is fine if you are talking about paying for medical care with your own money. The problem is that government programs operate on taking money from other people. You are infringing on their right to own property.

And doctors see a greater reduction in income as a result of national health care than any other group. It's hard not to consider universal health care an infringement of doctors' rights to make a living. The effective tax rate on a doctor in Britain, if you consider what they could make in the US, is something like 80%. That's pretty close to slavery, in my book, when you work 80% of your time for someone else, rather than for yourself.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Adaher!

me friend, i don't think it makes ye a slave.

What does making one a slave?

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

it makes ye thar countryman, thar brother...thar kin.

Calling a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

it means ye believe in somethin' more than just yerself, but a bigger community whar a risin' tide indeed does lift all boats.

It is funny that you reference a rising tide because the actual proposal is to bail water into someone else boat, thereby lowering and NOT rising all boats.

I submit it is not a bigger community that is more coercive. A bigger community would have people voluntarily giving to charity cases. A bigger community would have fewer people who are charity cases.

Originally Posted by Sadanie

My right to affordable health care doesn't take your right to affordable health care away!

You have no more a right to affordable health care than you have a right to an affordable Lamborghini. But my point was that claiming health care as a right means you must infringe on the right to other people’s property and time, since someone must provide that care.

You have “access” to health care. No one will deny you of care, but costs must be covered and if they are not those costs are shifted onto others.

Look at the per capita cost of providing health care to EVERYONE in European countries. . .and it is much lower than the per capita cost of providing health care to SOME in the U.S.. . .so providing health care to some is actually taking MORE from us than a system that involves providing health care to all would.

Comparing apples to fishes is not a valid comparison. We spend much more money because we are free to do so. Added to these so-called higher costs is $12 billion dollars in cosmetic surgery, most of it elective and not done for medical needs. Government programs like Medicare and Medicaid shifts costs onto the private sector inflating costs. The costs of drug development (America is the prime developer of new drugs) runs into the billions. The level of medical care in European countries is not as high as here in America. They have longer wait periods for treatment, lower rates of survivability for cancer heart disease, less excess to new drugs, doctor shortages, and rationing of medical care (I provide links below). Unlike Britain, American doctors and medical facilities face the threat of law suits which increases costs even more (in Britain there is a “loser pays” rule in their court system which cuts down on frivolous law suits). Because so many Americans receive their insurance through their employer, Americans do not realize the actual cost of the care they receive. We walk in to our doctor, pay our $20 co-pay and believe we have gotten a deal and do not understand that $20 is simply paying for the administrative costs and nothing else.

Things are not so wondrous under the European health care systems.
U.S. Cancer Care Is Number One | Publications | National Center for Policy Analysis | NCPA
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost - WSJ.com Free Market Cure - The Myths of Single-Payer Health Care
10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care | Publications | National Center for Policy Analysis | NCPA

A couple of other apples to fishes kind of comparisons you have asserted, often brought up by Progressives, are life expectancy differences between countries and the infant mortality rate. Neither of these are fair comparisons since neither of them are determined by the same methods in all countries. Life expectancy, as has been pointed out, has less to do with medical care and has much much more to do with life style. Also, the fact that America has a higher homicide rate than other Western countries, especially of young men, greatly affects the calculations of life expectancy. Infant mortality rates are not determined in the same manner in all countries. Here in America if a child is born and dies within the first year it affects the infant mortality rate. In several other countries, like Canada, Germany, and Austria, a premature baby weighing less than 500g it is not considered or counted as a live birth. Pajamas Media The Doctor Is In: Infant Mortality Comparisons a Statistical Miscarriage In Japan or Hong Kong a child that is born alive, but dies within the first 24 hours is reported as a miscarriage. In Belgium and France any baby born before 26 weeks gestation it is not considered alive. In Switzerland a baby born who is less than 30 centimeters long is not counted as a live birth. So, when you point to life expectancy and infant mortality as proof that Europe is so wonderful, understand that those numbers are not measuring the same phenomena.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Sadanie

My right to affordable health care doesn't take your right to affordable health care away!
Look at the per capita cost of providing health care to EVERYONE in European countries. . .and it is much lower than the per capita cost of providing health care to SOME in the U.S.. . .so providing health care to some is actually taking MORE from us than a system that involves providing health care to all would.

Only the government forcibly limits your access to health care, afforable or otherwise, by insisting on licensing and other infringements on the freedom of would-be health-care providers. For example, even a highly trained and nurse can't hang a shingle out saying something like "Nancy's Familty Practice limited to scrapes, bruising, scapres, abrasions, minor wound care and stitching." To do that Nancy would need to spend extra years in college getting a zillion-dollar medical degree. If I one day develop a brain tumor, I'd want the best qualified doctor I could find, but if someone wants to go to a guy working ut of his garage, or to a faith-healer who will cast out the demons in his head, since we're all created equal, who the hell am I to stop him, or to try to authorize a government to prevent him from getting the medical care he wants?