Catholics VS Health Care in America: Morally Embarrassing

[dmelosi]

Okay, lets say that all cloths shops in the world as a matter of solidarity gave a chunk of the profits they make from customers to fund abortions; would we be immoral to buy cloths from these organizations? I would argue “no”. Because the nature of society and practical need dictates that we have to rely on these people for cloths. Need absolves us from responsibility even though we know what they are going to do with the money.

We know that if America ever gets free-health care, the government is going to fund abortion through some of the tax they receive to fund the national health service. But regardless, Americans need free health-care.

Free health care is being held hostage on the moral grounds that people don’t want to fund abortion. But the reality is, it is not free health care that is going to make abortion worse or legal, its the human beings who want abortions that are making it worse. The issue of abortion has to be fought as a separate issue. I really don’t see how you are truly making a moral difference by rejecting a free-health service. In fact, instead of having just the evil of abortion in society, we also have the evil of people not having free-health-care; making America a doubly backwards nation. You are not making things better; in fact you are making it worse.

Instead of evangelizing America, you are wasting time trying to make change by denying people a moral good, and therefore bringing unnecessary resentment toward the Christian faith.

According the homily yesterday, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said that it is not only immoral to support the current health law, but a mortal sin to do so.

You are trying to convince us to get on the slippery slope where abortion means little. You are the one that is making this worse.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

According the homily yesterday, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops said that it is not only immoral to support the current health law, but a mortal sin to do so.

You are trying to convince us to get on the slippery slope where abortion means little. You are the one that is making this worse.

This might come as a surprise to you, but the title of Bishop is not a license of infallibility; i don’t care how many Bishops agree. You are just using that as an excuse to ignore the merits of my arguments.

I am not trying to get you on to any slippery slope. I am merely demonstrating that the acceptance of free-health-care has no relevance or rational connection to the acceptance of abortion.

 

[dmelosi]

This might come as a surprise to you, but the title of Bishop is not a license of infallibility; i don’t care how many Bishops agree. You are just using that as an excuse to ignore the merits of my arguments.

I am not trying to get you on to any slippery slope. I am merely demonstrating that the acceptance of free-health-care has no relevance or rational connection to the acceptance of abortion.

That is like saying that abortion has nothing to do with killing a human being.

It is a slippery slope that you are on, you have accepted abortion as part of health care.

It is not, it is killing a human being which is infallible.

You are trying to say that anyone who disagrees with you is evil. You are on a very slippery slope, what next will you say is irevelant or irrational?

 

[MindOverMatter2]

If I voted for a candidate that I was almost positive would go off and start and unjust war I would be wrong in doing so, unless voting for him/her was based on preventing an even greater evil.

Having both abortion and no free health care is a greater evil.

Uh we don’t have a choice but to hand over all power to the government to run 1/6th of our economy and run a nation wide government health care plan? There are lots of other ways of addressing the problem that don’t involve kicking the can down the road of tyranny. You bring up a good point though in that passing this law will knowingly make the government the one stop shop of healthcare for 99% of the population. Abortions are still legal here and it is very likely someone will sue after the law is in place and get their abortions covered even though our President has pledged that will not happen (yeah…sure). I cannot in good conscience give my government that kind of power with that outcome is the imperative.

You still don’t get it. You are proving my point by your very own words. The acceptance of health care has nothing to do with the legality of abortion. Like i said you are not voting for abortion; you are voting for free health care. If after the fact of health care they include abortion even though they said otherwise, it is not your sin

Its not difficult. It does not matter whether or not you suspect that your government will lie. You are not actually making things better; you are not truly challenging abortion.

Also, even if you know your government uses tax payers money to do evil; as a citizens you still have a moral duty to vote for services that benefit peoples needs.

Abortion laws and free health care are clearly separate moral issues.

In any case; somebody pointed out that the health-care reform that is coming in your country is not the same thing as the NHS. I support the NHS service only.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

That is like saying that abortion has nothing to do with killing a human being.

Red herring.

…you have accepted abortion as part of health care.

I have not. I have accepted that abortion is going to exists whether we like it or not. I am not naive enough to think that denying people free health care is an act of good or is going to prevent anything.

It is not, it is killing a human being which is infallible.

You are trying to say that anyone who disagrees with you is evil.

I think you’re either brainwashed into thinking that their is a logical connection between free heath-care and the legality of abortion, or you are using abortion as an excuse not to give free-heath care to the poor because you don’t want to pay for the poor; thus it is an absolute imperative on your part to make it seem that the acceptance of free-health care is also the acceptance of abortion. Of course, those that have been brainwashed certainly “mean-well”, even though they are wrong.

You are on a very slippery slope, what next will you say is irevelant or irrational?

I will probably say something a lot more reasonable than you could ever comprehend.

 

[Nate13]

Having both abortion and no free health care is a greater evil.

But everyone is receiving care that wants it, its just not as efficient as it could be…

You still don’t get it. You are proving my point by your very own words. The acceptance of health care has nothing to do with the legality of abortion. Like i said you are not voting for abortion; you are voting for free health care. If after the fact of health care they include abortion even though they said otherwise, it is not your sin

Yes, voting for this government health care proposal is a vote for more abortions in this case. I’ve already said multiple times there are alternatives that could be used that would achieve the same ends. I feel no obligation to vote for this proposal, especially since everyone who wants it is receiving a good proportion of care.

Its not difficult. It does not matter whether or not you suspect that your government will lie. You are not actually making things better; you are not truly challenging abortion.

Yes we are. This is the fight at hand at this moment. This law would make healthcare worse for the vast majority of American’s in the long term and will result in more abortion, contraceptives, and morning after pills being used.

Also, even if you know your government uses tax payers money to do evil; as a citizens you still have a moral duty to vote for services that benefit peoples needs.
Abortion laws and free health care are clearly separate moral issues.

I cannot believe the nerve you have in coming here and question people’s morality including the American Bishops now. Your comments here show you do not even know the true state of American health care and your repeated use of the term “free health care” is laughable.

In any case; somebody pointed out that the health-care reform that is coming in your country is not the same thing as the NHS. I support the NHS service only.

Unlike you I will not comment on things I do no know about such as how the NHS is set up. If it is based on an individual mandate that requires everyone who breathes to buy healthcare or pay a fine I would be against it. I support giving people as much liberty as possible and forming solutions that work to achieve that.

 

[Nate13]

This might come as a surprise to you, but the title of Bishop is not a license of infallibility; i don’t care how many Bishops agree. You are just using that as an excuse to ignore the merits of my arguments.

I am not trying to get you on to any slippery slope. I am merely demonstrating that the acceptance of free-health-care has no relevance or rational connection to the acceptance of abortion.

Why should American’s care a bit about what you say, when you slander our Bishops as such? Did you know the Bishops consulted the Pope before this statement came out? It is not an infallible statement, but it is the truth none the less.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Why should American’s care a bit about what you say, when you slander our Bishops as such? Did you know the Bishops consulted the Pope before this statement came out? It is not an infallible statement, but it is the truth none the less.

The truth has to be demonstrated rationally. I don’t care who the bishops consulted. If they are against free health care, then they are wrong. A truth isn’t a truth just because it happens to be the opinion of the Pope or Bishop.

 

[dmelosi]

The truth has to be demonstrated rationally. I don’t care who the bishops consulted. If they are against free health care, then they are wrong.

It is obvious that someone is very very wrong.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

But everyone is receiving care that wants it, its just not as efficient as it could be…

We are talking about a full, sufficient, and dignified health care system that does not rely upon market rates.

 

[JimG]

We are talking about a full, sufficient, and dignified health care system that does not rely upon market rates.

There is no such entity as “free health care,” nor can there ever be, this side of heaven.

A system which does not rely on market rates will rely on government set rates. That will lead to distortions and shortages, and less health care.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

But everyone is receiving care that wants it

Other peoples experiences do not reflect what you are saying, so either they are lying or you are. I think you are insulting some of the members on this forum who have testified to the fact that the care received is not good enough.

Yes, voting for this government health care proposal is a vote for more abortions

No it is not. I demonstrated why. You haven’t refuted it.

in this case. I’ve already said multiple times there are alternatives that could be used that would achieve the same ends.

The alternatives you speak of are no good. They are simply profitable for those who don’t want to be taxed for other peoples health care.

since everyone who wants it is receiving a good proportion of care.

That is not true according to the testimony i have seen on this thread. Are you calling them lier’s?

Yes we are.

This is the fight at hand at this moment. This law would make healthcare worse for the vast majority of American’s in the long term and will result in more abortion, contraceptives, and morning after pills being used.

I see no valid argument here except for more assertions. Free health care can only result in more abortions if people want abortions; so its your job as a Catholic to convince them to not have abortions. But the fact that you are failing at your job has no relevance to the fact that people need an NHS so that the poor can receive a reasonable degree of health care. If you want to pay for private, thats up to you.

I cannot believe the nerve you have in coming here and question people’s morality including the American Bishops now.

I will question anybody who talks nonsense, and if the Pope favors something i know to be wrong i will not hesitate to rebuke him. I do not worship the whim and opinion of the Pope. Until he speaks infallibly on the matter, i have every right to question the intentions and the moral interpretation of the bishops regarding this issue. I have no problem walking right up to Popes face and telling him what i think about free health care.

Your comments here show you do not even know the true state of American health care and your repeated use of the term “free health care” is laughable.

I don’t live in America, but i do live in a place where there is NHS, and at the very least i know about people’s testimony regarding health care in America. It is evident that you feel compelled to call them lier’s. But you haven’t given me any reason to agree with you except assertions. Perhaps you are hoping and relying upon me being ignorant on these matters so that you can twist reality in your favor.

Unlike you I will not comment on things I do no know about

Then don’t comment on or participate in moral decision-making at all.

I support giving people as much liberty as possible and forming solutions that work to achieve that.

The solutions you are giving are not good enough. Liberty becomes immorality when the system is set up to allow the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

There is no such entity as “free health care,” nor can there ever be, this side of heaven.

A system which does not rely on market rates will rely on government set rates. That will lead to distortions and shortages, and less health care.

So according to you the NHS does not exist.

I think what you mean to say is that there will be less profits for the middle class and the rich. Oh poor you. Its not my fault you support a draconian market system in the first place. What you will lose in terms of greedy materialism has no bearing on what people need in terms of health.

I really think you need to stop with the assertions and make reasonable arguments instead. Right now, it would not surprise me if some people in America still live in caves.

 

[JimG]

So according to you the NHS does not exist.

I think what you mean to say is that there will be less profits for the middle class and the rich. Oh poor you. Its not my fault you support a draconian market system in the first place. What you will lose in terms of greedy materialism has no bearing on what people need in terms of health.

I really think you need to stop with the assertions and make reasonable arguments instead. Right now, it would not surprise me if some people in America still live in caves.

I have no doubt that the NHS exists. What I’m pretty sure of is that it does not consist of “free health care.” I’m presuming that doctors, nurses, orderlies, pharmacists, ER technicians, radiologists, and numerous others all get paid. I mean, it would be a gross injustice not to pay them.

And if they are being paid, the health care is not “free.”

As to how well it works, I’m not a resident of the UK, so others will have to answer that. If prices are not set by the market, who does set them? The NHS?

There are 62 million people in Britain. If the NHS works for them, fine. Can it be made to work for 301 million in the U.S.? Perhaps, but the market distortions would be severe. It would be made worse by the fact that a large percentage of U.S. physicians would likely get out of the profession or retire early.

 

[jhigh]

If you have a “right” to “free health care” then, by the definition of what a right is, everyone has a right to free health care - including the very, very wealthy. If you, by right, don’t have to pay for yours, then they, by right, don’t have to pay for theirs, either. The question then is, if no one has to pay for health care…who pays for health care?

Sorry, but “someone else” doesn’t exist.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

If you have a “right” to “free health care” then, by the definition of what a right is, everyone has a right to free health care - including the very, very wealthy. If you, by right, don’t have to pay for yours, then they, by right, don’t have to pay for theirs, either. The question then is, if no one has to pay for health care…who pays for health care?

Sorry, but “someone else” doesn’t exist.

You have made a complete straw-man of what i and others have said. Perhaps you should read properly in the future. And just in-case you are unaware, people would be taxed, particular the wealthy.

Nobody is defending service where people work for free; but rather how such a service should be payed for is the most important distinction under discussion. Since my country has an NHS, please refrain from ridiculous straw-men, because it will not fool me; you are only fooling yourself.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

I have no doubt that the NHS exists. What I’m pretty sure of is that it does not consist of “free health care.” I’m presuming that doctors, nurses, orderlies, pharmacists, ER technicians, radiologists, and numerous others all get paid.

Since you have no intention of addressing my arguments properly and would more prefer to make blatant straw-men of my arguments, a fruitful discussion is no-longer possible.

PS. It is obvious to anybody reading the thread that i was not defending a service were people did not get paid.

Get some reading glasses.

 

[LemonAndLime]

If you have a “right” to “free health care” then, by the definition of what a right is, everyone has a right to free health care - including the very, very wealthy. If you, by right, don’t have to pay for yours, then they, by right, don’t have to pay for theirs, either. The question then is, if no one has to pay for health care…who pays for health care?

Sorry, but “someone else” doesn’t exist.

We pay for it in taxes. No one is hiding that.

We pay for it in taxes on the assumption that like insurance, we may not have to claim what we pay in. Apart from its cheaper and my doctor doesn’t have a financial interest in my illness.

 

[MindOverMatter2]

…my doctor doesn’t have a financial interest in my illness.

I find the whole concept bizarre.

Have you ever seen a film called “Repo Men” starring Jude Law. Its a film about a bailiff who has the job of taking back body organs from customers who can’t keep up with the payments.

Freaky film. Guess what country its filmed in. It begins with a giant “A”

 

[dmelosi]

I find the whole concept bizarre.

Have you ever seen a film called “Repo Men” starring Jude Law. Its a film about a bailiff who has the job of taking back body organs from customers who can’t keep up with the payments.

Freaky film. Guess what country its filmed in. It begins with a giant “A”

Guess what your healthcare has in it that you don’t seem to mind? It starts with a giant “A” for kill the unborn.