Calling all Americans Catholics! I have questions for you!

[nannygirl]

I think it is important to note here(given the OP) that the very reason health care is so expensive is because the govt got involved in it years ago. They got involved for good reasons but the result is the mess we have now.

If you have time go back and study the history of Medicine in this country, do so. It will take a while but you will have a much better understanding of why we are where we are.

You are right on!

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

This is a good point. In fact Katrina was brought up earlier. Katrina is the poster child for govt, ineffeciency. FEMA was responsable for evacuating, feeding, and sheltering hundreds of thousands of people after two levys broke flooding most of the major roadways into the city. The media, and leftwing policiticans along with the racebaiters charged the president with everything from the hurricaine itself to racism, because FEMA didn’t do a bang up job.

Is this completely insane to anyone else? FEMA was expected to call up the National Guard units (many of which recently returned from Iraq) from across the midwest and south, to evacuate hundreds of thousands of people after levys failed flooding the city. Yet these people couldn’t get just themselves out in the days before when there was no flooding and ample warning of what was to come. But who is the bad guy here? George W. Bush!! and why? Becuase he is a rich white man who doesn’t care about black people!

That is the gist of the original post. Americans are greedy racists and the source of all that is bad in the world. Well, I am sorry but I am not going to read this stuff anymore and keep quiet.

your point is valid. I would also like to add that President Bush, I recall very vividly, got on National television and pleaded with people to leave the city, along with the governor, and the mayors of the surrounding areas.

I would like to point out one thing, though. All of the Hurricane evacuation preparedness done by the state, city and parishes didn’t work…or else they just failed to count all of the thousands of people…especially elderly and young children whose parents are totally irresponsible…had no way to get out of the city.
One man saw a school bus just sitting on a lot, and he jumpstarted it, took it to pick up people who had no way to evacuate…elderly and the children they care for…and was evacuating. And he was arrested for stealing the bus. The government punished him for taking whatever means he could to help people leave the city, and they punished him. My question is; WHY ON EARTH WAS THE BUS NOT ALREADY IN THE SERVICE OF HELPING THE HELPLESS EVACUATE!!!
So, what does the government do, they persecute and prosecate the man who took matters into his own hands. People, I am not exaggerating…though I wish I was.
The government is totally inept. Why should we let them run our healthcare plan when they cannot even manage to not prosecute someone who was trying to do what they promised that they would do…but were failing at.

Point is:
They shouldn’t have promised to evacuate everyone. They should have let the Churches and charitable organizations know that these people would be left on their own if an evacuation was needed. The churches and charitable organizations would have made sure to know exactly who needed to be helped, and the persons who volunteered to do the job would not have failed. And that is because the volunteers would have cared about the persons as individuals, not just some nameless face that meant nothing to them.
Am I correct do you think?

 

[nannygirl]

Someone asks this question everytime there is a conversation about helping the poor.

So? It’s a valid question, especially when “the church” is accused of not caring about the poor. Who is the Church? It’s made up of individual believers, so each of us are responsible for caring for the poor.
If someone’s gonna complain that the Church isn’t doing its share to care for the poor, then it’s valid to ask what that person is doing to help the poor. Is that person putting their time and money where their mouth is? Perhaps they can help us fellow Catholics get on the right track. .

 

[Caesar517]

It may be valid on occasion, I just get so sick of seeing it everywhere. It never seems to help a discussion.

 

[ribozyme]

Well as long as the Rich can get better health care then the poor. I am all for it.

It also takes the burden off of the church, who is suppose to take care of the poor. Now we can spend our money on important things like stain glass windows and Golden Crosses.

Well, why would you like that? I guess you want the lives of the poor to be really miserable. Why shouldn’t the poor get the same quality of care? I suppose they shouldn’t because they are inferior in your worldview.

 

[KenEOTE]

Well, why would you like that? I guess you want the lives of the poor to be really miserable. Why shouldn’t the poor get the same quality of care? I suppose they shouldn’t because they are inferior in your worldview.

It is called Sarcasm. Sorry I forgot to put a little smile face by it.

 

[KenEOTE]

I’m curious. What are you personally doing to take care of the poor?

Well when I can I give to different charities. I also have worked at and with some inner city missions that feed the homeless as well as help them find jobs.

I have bought lunch for some homeless, and I have given some clothes.

What do you do?

 

[KenEOTE]

Well, why would you like that? I guess you want the lives of the poor to be really miserable. Why shouldn’t the poor get the same quality of care? I suppose they shouldn’t because they are inferior in your worldview.

Also thanks for assuming you know my worldview and judging…

I believe it is in the Bible to Judge not lest ye be Judged.

 

[nannygirl]

It may be valid on occasion, I just get so sick of seeing it everywhere. It never seems to help a discussion.

If you don’t wish to discuss it, then please ignore the posts.
I guess for some it’s too hard a question to answer…

 

[nannygirl]

Well when I can I give to different charities. I also have worked at and with some inner city missions that feed the homeless as well as help them find jobs.

I have bought lunch for some homeless, and I have given some clothes.

What do you do?

I’m so glad to hear it and I expected it. I do almost exactly what you do. I would hope that others would be there to help me in a time of crisis. There is always an opportunity to help someone out. (Jesus said the poor would always be with us.)
It’s the little things we do on a day-to-day basis…

 

[KenEOTE]

Part of why I am against the government getting involved in this way is that it is the Churches Job to take care of the poor and the widow. We let the excuse that the Government doing it to keep us form doing what God wants us to do.

Also the Government always screws things up and makes a bigger mess.

As far as free Health Care I see it as messing up the system worse then it is already.

I know many doctors who do free work for the less fortunate. We just need more Christian Doctors willing to give of their time. My dad was an Optometrist and helped out a lot of less fortunate people with eye care.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

“Socialists” is your word for people who want a more compassionate place to live it would seem.

What about the concept of fairness.

To be honest, if eveybody got equal health care and access to it, I couldn’t care less of Donald Trump paid for it.

The only problem with that is that, if the government runs the healthcare, then “of course some deserve more fair care and access to it than others” would come into play.

Another major question is this: who decides what is fair?

scenario #1: Bob has broken his arm. He goes to the Emergency Room. He sits for 2 hours waiting for his turn to be seen. The nurse calls his name to go to a room, but Chester comes into the Emergency Room as Bob gets up. Chester is having chest pains. There is only one room available. Who gets it?

Now, morally we can agree that Chester should get the room, for he might very well be having a heart attack. But Bob was there first, and he has been there for 2 hours patiently waiting his turn. So, in all fairness, Bob should be the one to get the room, and Chester should have to wait in line as Bob did.

Who makes the decision? The government? The government had to throw out moral behaviour when it stated that morality and truth were relative to each person’s own interpretation.

Scenario #2: The government has only issued a certain amount of money to the hospital to take care of heart attack patients. Chester gets turned away because they have used up all of the allotted money for heart attack patients. He dies.
PS. A lot of the money to pay for medical supplies and medicine went instead into a politicians pocket for “paper work”.

And don’t think for one minute that those things aren’t happening in England and Canada. It sometimes does manage to slip past Liberal news reports.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Well what do you mean by fairness?

Is it fair to take away from Donald Trump who worked hard for his money only to have it ripped away and put into a fund to give things to people who may not be working as hard as he has to get where he is at?

What is fair to one person is not fair to another.
We already have “Free” education in this country. If you want to get ahead then study, work hard and make something of yourself. Don’t sit and expect to have someone hand it to you,

I started my own company, when it failed I didn’t go get well fair or cry I went and got a Job. I worked for Wal-mart for a while (I have a college Degree and this was humbling) Then I found a job doing what I had studied to do.

I hate to say it but if you flunk out of school, and don’t get a job, its your own fault you end up where you are at. Yes there are people who lose jobs all the time, but most of those people go back and work to find another, not sit around waiting for the government to help them.

yeah! yeah! yeah! I realize I may be stuck in the group who you are putting down, but to be honest, I hate the circumstances I am stuck in at this moment. I have to have this operation. I do not…even working…have the money to pay for it. The doctor nor hospital will consider taking me without money up front and a way to make sure they get paid the rest. I spend my money taking care of my kids. I am not one to splurge. The way things are right now, I am more grateful to my parents than ever. At least all I have to accept or ask for is medical attention for this moment. come August 25, my job is already lined up…God willing. My point is, the government needs to do tort reform to stop the hundred million dollar bogus lawsuits, so that people can afford insurance and doctor bills. Many people are sick, and because of government rules, they cannot get medical help if they have a job. The government works against them helping themselves. If the government stepped out of the picture, and the Church took over the hospitals and clinics like is used to be, I could continue working and still afford to get my surgery and if I needed any help, there could be charity that I could recieve. And as I got on my feet after the surgery, I would donate back into that system. The most significant difference is that the Church and charitable organizations see each individual as an entire person with the dignity given them by God. And they treat the whole person. With the government, you are lucky if they remember your personal id number. Actually they don’t…that’s how unimportant you are to them.

 

[Oscarthecat]

If you don’t wish to discuss it, then please ignore the posts.
I guess for some it’s too hard a question to answer…

It isn’t a hard question- it Is just a frustrating question because it is generally a prelude to an ad hominem attack.

In most cases when I am asked that question the reply is either that I am not doing enough, regardless of what I actually do, or an unsubstaniated claim that most people can’t be counted on to be as charitable as me. Lately this has also been followed by a lament from someone about why we can’t all be more like George soros.

It is nice to see by your follow up that you did not mean the question in the way it is usually used.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Well, why would you like that? I guess you want the lives of the poor to be really miserable. Why shouldn’t the poor get the same quality of care? I suppose they shouldn’t because they are inferior in your worldview.

Ribo, you really should learn to recognize sarcasm when you read it.

 

[seekerz]

The only problem with that is that, if the government runs the healthcare, then “of course some deserve more fair care and access to it than others” would come into play.

Another major question is this: who decides what is fair?

scenario #1: Bob has broken his arm. He goes to the Emergency Room. He sits for 2 hours waiting for his turn to be seen. The nurse calls his name to go to a room, but Chester comes into the Emergency Room as Bob gets up. Chester is having chest pains. There is only one room available. Who gets it?

Now, morally we can agree that Chester should get the room, for he might very well be having a heart attack. But Bob was there first, and he has been there for 2 hours patiently waiting his turn. So, in all fairness, Bob should be the one to get the room, and Chester should have to wait in line as Bob did.

Who makes the decision? The government? The government had to throw out moral behaviour when it stated that morality and truth were relative to each person’s own interpretation.

Scenario #2: The government has only issued a certain amount of money to the hospital to take care of heart attack patients. Chester gets turned away because they have used up all of the allotted money for heart attack patients. He dies.
PS. A lot of the money to pay for medical supplies and medicine went instead into a politicians pocket for “paper work”.

And don’t think for one minute that those things aren’t happening in England and Canada. It sometimes does manage to slip past Liberal news reports.

If anything like scenario #1 happens then it is bad medicine - period! Not the fault of politicians or insurance companies or ideologies. The person with the chest pain should, by all the precepts of standard medical care, get seen first because chest pain may indicate a life-threatening emergency while an uncomplicated broken bone does not.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

If anything like scenario #1 happens then it is bad medicine - period! Not the fault of politicians or insurance companies or ideologies. The person with the chest pain should, by all the precepts of standard medical care, get seen first because chest pain may indicate a life-threatening emergency while an uncomplicated broken bone does not.

I agree to a point. But, without the morality to decide what is good or bad medicine, if it is simply a matter of “fairness”, then the question becomes relative.
We know what the correct answer, because we have a sense of morality. The decision is not even a decision at all. But if all healthcare became a “state” program, they will have the “separation of Church and state” stigma attached to it. Maybe not immediatly, but not soon after. They have kicked God (with the ACLU suing at every instance to be found where God has not been kicked out) out of every other program run by the government. It is only common sense to know for sure, that it would be kicked out of the Medical Profession also. And the reason that many medical students are not forced to learn how to do abortions and go through a period of time doing them, is that the government does not control it. If the Medical industry is run by the government, that will change. Then these medical students will not have a choice except to not become doctors.
And when God is kicked out of the Healthcare / Medical Industry, there will be no one to say, “Well, Chester’s life was in danger, which was more important than the broken arm of Bob.”
It won’t make common sense, but then we are talking about the government. All of the government programs in the country are lacking basic common sense. Such as, if a single mother and sole provider of 4 children makes more than $250 per month, she is not in need of help with medical bills. They do not take into consideration rent, utilities, food, car insurance and any number of other things that must be taken care of with that $260 dollars a month.
This decision of the government definitely lacks common sense. Wouldn’t you agree?
So, we could realistically assume that scenario #1 would be possible.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

If anything like scenario #1 happens then it is bad medicine - period! Not the fault of politicians or insurance companies or ideologies. The person with the chest pain should, by all the precepts of standard medical care, get seen first because chest pain may indicate a life-threatening emergency while an uncomplicated broken bone does not.

My point is, with it being a government run program, individual lives won’t matter any longer.

 

[Ghoti]

The only problem with that is that, if the government runs the healthcare, then “of course some deserve more fair care and access to it than others” would come into play.

Another major question is this: who decides what is fair?

scenario #1: Bob has broken his arm. He goes to the Emergency Room. He sits for 2 hours waiting for his turn to be seen. The nurse calls his name to go to a room, but Chester comes into the Emergency Room as Bob gets up. Chester is having chest pains. There is only one room available. Who gets it?

Now, morally we can agree that Chester should get the room, for he might very well be having a heart attack. But Bob was there first, and he has been there for 2 hours patiently waiting his turn. So, in all fairness, Bob should be the one to get the room, and Chester should have to wait in line as Bob did.

**Who makes the decision? ** The government? The government had to throw out moral behaviour when it stated that morality and truth were relative to each person’s own interpretation.

The triage nurse/doctor.

When I went to the hospital with stomach pains, I was high on the pecking order. Due to the possible serious problems attached to abdominal pains like mine, the only people who went ahead of me were trauma, chest pain, and anyone chained to a cop. When I arrived, the triage nurse took my info, and then also took my BP and temp. I was also informed to sit close by so she could keep an eye on me. I eventually got in to see a doctor, was diagnosed with mild food poisoning, kept an eye on while it ran its course and I was ambulatory, and sent home.

In the meanwhile, before I got in, there were quite a few heart attacks, at least two traumas, and about three handcuffed to a gurney or a policeman.

I went to a doctor with a major boil (good gravy, those things are painful!) – he took a quick look at it, and immediately called the hospital to have me seen. Apparently the boil was extremely close to a major blood vessel, so I was running a risk of blood poisoning. Within an hour I was on my way to the hospital, where they were waiting for me, and had me “treated”. :knight2:

In both cases, I was treated based on the severity and danger of my condition. Triage.

 

[Leebo]

“Socialists” is your word for people who want a more compassionate place to live it would seem.

What about the concept of fairness.

To be honest, if eveybody got equal health care and access to it, I couldn’t care less of Donald Trump paid for it.

I commend you for wanting a more compassionate world. But the world of is full of human beings. Humans are awefully selfish and flawed in numerous ways.

There have been many a government who have claimed to have the right stuff to make the perfect, compassionate, prosperous community where everyone is treated exactly the same. Usually what follows is imprisonment and murder on enourmous scale.

The founders of the US were smart enough to know that government itself was a bad idea. They actually looked back throughout history and saw that power and govenment were inheriently corrupt, due to human nature. So they set up a limited govt with checks and balances to curb the power and prevent an “elitist” ruling class from oppressing other groups of people in the name of the collective good. Our system is very flawed and far from perfect which is a good reason to not grow the govt any bigger than it already is.

The church should be doing much more. But alot of churches aren’t bearing the fruit you would expect from truely holy congregation. I am hopeful that things are starting to change in at least a few parishes around the country. But if I expect that to happen, it starts with me, a sinful, selfish human being. How do I overcome my selfish sinful nature in order to truely help the needy? I have to become more Holy, partaking in the gifts of the sacraments of the church would be a good start. Wish me luck and pray for me.