Change of heart on socialized medicine

  • Thread starter Thread starter royal_archer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If it is so successfull fro those other countries then people should move to those countries. We have open borders and are not forcing anyone to stay here.

I wish everyone would have access to health care. I also wish every person was celebate up to their wedding day. Do you really want me forcing my morality on you?
Didn’t we just discuss how I’m more or less stuck, because you cannot emigrate to most 1st world countries if you have debt, anyone who’s sick will have lots of debt. Thus cannot emigrate without claiming refuge status, which is literally what I will be doing when I get to the Netherlands.
 
Didn’t we just discuss how I’m more or less stuck, because you cannot emigrate to most 1st world countries if you have debt, anyone who’s sick will have lots of debt. Thus cannot emigrate without claiming refuge status, which is literally what I will be doing when I get to the Netherlands.
I don’t know who, or how many. But over you and how you have been treated, mark my owrds there will be someone going to Hell over it. Your situation proves that most people in our society do not have their priorities anywhere near correct. Thats why my becoming a hermit, while I have not decided to yet is looking better as time goes by for me.
 
I don’t know who, or how many. But over you and how you have been treated, mark my owrds there will be someone going to Hell over it. Your situation proves that most people in our society do not have their priorities anywhere near correct. Thats why my becoming a hermit, while I have not decided to yet is looking better as time goes by for me.
Code:
It is just that those who bend the knee to their gods are so blinded they can’t see the other who is in anguish. Makes me think of the story of Lazarus, the very poor brother.
 
If it is so successfull fro those other countries then people should move to those countries. We have open borders and are not forcing anyone to stay here.
Its true that there is a growing number of Americans seeking the employment opportunities in Europe. This has given birth to the Blue Card. However, just because there are some good opportunities for Americans overseas doesn’t mean we have to give up on this country.
I wish everyone would have access to health care.
Me too, and there is no reason they can’t have it.
I also wish every person was celebate up to their wedding day.
Me too.
Do you really want me forcing my morality on you?
Well universal healthcare isn’t just a morality issue. Its a human rights issue. Considering all of the things we just take for granted as being part in parcel with living in a society, most are luxuries when compared to healthcare. Health is basic.
Don’t presume I want to fund all of these at the level they are funded. Education and libraries are a local issue. The military and roads are authorized by the constitution. Roads are funded through taxes on gas and in a way self supporting (yeah there are problems there but not for this thread). I think the defense department is too lopsided towards occupasional capabilities and not as capable as it should be for pure defense of the boarders. (maybe if we brought those troops home and their hospitals, it would reduce the cost of health insurance here). If those other countries were forced to pick up a bigger share of there defense we would have more money for jobs (with insurace) here although that would force those countries to divert money from health care to their defense.
I agree that we probably focus to much on occupational capabilities. Which is not something that the founding fathers envisioned. Indeed they typically would let the military all but completely disband and then would muster when a conflict arose. If we focused more on defense we might be able to improve benefits for our soldiers. I’m all about giving perks to those that serve. The money saved there could also help to get everyone the healthcare they need.
But why should a person who is just scraping by have to take food off their own table in order to buy medicine for someone else?
Well people in that sort of situation would be one of the ones benefitted. They would no longer be in danger of medical bankruptcy, or in health danger from just not being able to go. People save a lot of money when health expenses are removed.
And many keep pointing out the very rare cases of people who through no fault of their own were unable take care of themselves and never had any chance at making it on their own. The reality is that most on public assistance are their through a lack of effort on their part. Why should I not be able to give my money to truly needy people whom I know are in dire straits through no fault of their own?
While it is a common misconception, that there is an invisible army of lazy people who are the ones without healthcare. Most of the people who are without health care are employed. There is also the fact that many who have insurance don’t have insurance that covers their needs. I have an excellent job, I make good money and I work for a major company that is pretty much sailing through the recession. In other words I’m in a good spot. However, I spend quiet a bit on medical costs. I usually have to put off doctor’s visits to save up for my part of the pay. Also most of the issues I have that most impacting to my life aren’t even covered. So that just comes out of pocket. In short, my insurance takes the edge off my bills, but I more or less am the one paying for most of it.

Now thankfully the Lord has provided that I can handle all of those costs but others are not so lucky. I have a co-worker who could only take his wife to catastrophic care for a year because the company messed up his coverage. Another colleague of mine is drowning in debt from the medical bills for his kids, and both of them make more than I do. The issue with medical coverage goes deep into the middle class.
 
I’ve had a change of heart on socialized medicine. No, I have not bought in to the whole scheme but though I should at least consider if the ends will justify the means. This is not in the politics section because I don’t want to talk about the current legislation. I want to talk about the general concept of a government run medical system. Basically the how can we use this evil to achieve a greater good.
Intrinsic evil can never be justified by the alleged good it will achieve. However, I can’t see any reason to describe a “government-run medical system” as intrinsically evil. So presumably what you mean is that even though there are great dangers and disadvantages to such a system, there may also be good that can be achieved by this means. That’s reasonable. But your way of putting things is odd and confusing.
Assuming the republicans take over in 2-4 years. Or, a moral group comes out of the democrats
Or out of the Republicans. Unless you are maintaining the highly dubious proposition that the Republicans are currently a “moral group.”
  1. Abortion. If abortion agencies sole source of income comes from the government, we could cut off the money source and put them all out of business.
Cutting off funding to abortion agencies (which would certainly be the right thing to do) would simply mean that abortions would be funded privately.
  1. Abortion again. RVW based the decision on “privacy” with Government Run Health Care (GRHC) we won’t have any “privacy” all of those medical records would be available to the government and we could retroactively prosecute baby killers, all without violating the issues leading to RVW.
I don’t think a legal case could be made for retroactively prosecuting people for something that was not a crime at the time. The case would have to be made based on some kind of “crimes against humanity” allegation, not on U.S. law. I don’t think it would be a good road to go down.
  1. Crime. We could isolate genetic and psychological markers that indicate higher likely hood of someone being a criminal, review their medical records or have doctors run specific tests, and identify potential criminals earlier. Then we can handle them proactively.
This is not a “good” that could be achieved through an “evil” means. It is an indisputable evil in itself. The Catholic Church, and all other orthodox Christian churches, believes in free will. That means that to “handle” people as “potential criminals” is a grave affront to human dignity.
  1. Poverty. We could force doctors to give people medicine that would make them more productive.
Again, this is immoral because it bypasses free will and degrades human dignity.
  1. Morality. We could do some national monitoring of morality and funnel health care dollars to more moral states and cut off funds to less moral states.
National monitoring of morality is a far worse evil than any supposed evil intrinsic to a “government run health care system.” Or rather, it is precisely the kind of evil I fear *if *the government becomes too powerful.

There are no simple criteria to distinguish “moral” from “less moral” states.

Edwin
 
Why not Nationalized Auto insurance too? That way the DMV can be connected to insurance applications. We could tie it in with health-care so “mentally disturbed” or those with noted alcohol or drug addictions on their health record would have to pay higher premiums for the next 10 years just like a credit report, or just keep them off the road period…
Oh yeah!! Talk about safe roads and fewer accidents… Sounds like the perfect world where individual choices can be replaced by laws based on statistics and proven facts… Devilishly perfect.
 
But the left says the ends justify the means.
Who on the “left”? The “left” is not monolithic. Give names.
Les face it any socialized medicine is totalinarianism in some degree
No reason to face something unreal and illogical. “Totalitarianism in some degree” is a contradiction in terms. Totalitarianism means that at least in principle the government has total control over a society and individual freedom is not considered sacred. Nothing about “socialized medicine” implies totalitarianism in any way. It may be a bad move. It may open up the door to certain evils–indeed, that’s a safe thing to say, since *any *policy decision does that. But it’s not totalitarianism. There is nothing to “face” except your inflated rhetoric and refusal to think logically.
this is just a logical extension of where the left wants to take us
No, it’s nothing of the kind.
and lets face it if nationalized medicine gets passed they will abuse it so if it is going to be abused why not abuse it in ways that bennefit the right side of society instead of just the left?
Your eagerness to engage in “abuse” is deeply disturbing.

Humans are sinful. We abuse everything. But virtuous humans try not to do so. Why not pursue virtue? It’s more fun than it looks.

Edwin
 
To the OP:

Precisely why I don’t want government run health care. Retroactively prosecuting people? Making decisions on the worthiness of people? Persecuting people for their genes? Wow.
Bear in mind that this isn’t what the “left” is saying (well, some on the left may say such things, but no such citations have been presented here so far). It’s what a right-wing person on this forum is saying.

The only point this thread has made is that even if left-wing folks can be trusted with government power, right-wing people like the OP clearly can’t!

Edwin
 
I’m sorry for your situation, but my coverage should not suffer to give you coverage.
Why not? On what moral principle do you base this claim?

Based on the principle that we should love our neighbors as ourselves, your claim seems highly dubious.

Edwin
 
Why attack Arwen because she (?) wants to keep some of the money she earned.
Because money doesn’t matter. People matter.
The sin is in trying to take that moeny like several of those posters here are trying to do.
When the chips are down and human beings are in suffering or danger, private property becomes irrelevant. That is not some kind of modern socialist heresy. It’s the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Edwin
 
Yes, but the Vatican thinks that WE should do this…
You are assuming that the “we” only means groups of individuals acting on their own initiative. I think that’s pretty clearly a misreading of Catholic teaching. The “we” includes “we as a society” as well.

Edwin
 
I’m not hording treasure, . . . Pathia just wants the government to hold back my wages to pay for those who can’t pay for themselves.
The second statement contradicts the first. You are “hoarding treasure” if you grudge the use of your surplus to supply someone else’s needs.

Edwin
 
My money is not more important than preventing pathia from dying, but my rights to my money are.
Based on what? There is no orthodox theological or moral principle that supports what you are saying.

Private property is not more important than human life. To say that it is constitutes heresy and idolatry of the most vicious and contemptible kind.

Edwin
 
Because money doesn’t matter. People matter.

When the chips are down and human beings are in suffering or danger, private property becomes irrelevant. That is not some kind of modern socialist heresy. It’s the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Edwin
Code:
I sure wish there were more like you on these fora.👍
 
Why not Nationalized Auto insurance too? That way the DMV can be connected to insurance applications. We could tie it in with health-care so “mentally disturbed” or those with noted alcohol or drug addictions on their health record would have to pay higher premiums for the next 10 years just like a credit report, or just keep them off the road period…
Oh yeah!! Talk about safe roads and fewer accidents… Sounds like the perfect world where individual choices can be replaced by laws based on statistics and proven facts… Devilishly perfect.
Ok since you know everything and ,everyaspect of life is a choice. What should Pathia do? Iv'e gotta hear this one!
 
Because money doesn’t matter. People matter.

Like I said we have a floating currency, so float it baby! Roll them printing presses. Thats whzat they are doing now a record pace anyway. Lets bring some good out of that for a change.:cool:
 
Didn’t we just discuss how I’m more or less stuck, because you cannot emigrate to most 1st world countries if you have debt, anyone who’s sick will have lots of debt. Thus cannot emigrate without claiming refuge status, which is literally what I will be doing when I get to the Netherlands.
I was not talking about you.
 
I don’t know who, or how many. But over you and how you have been treated, mark my owrds there will be someone going to Hell over it. Your situation proves that most people in our society do not have their priorities anywhere near correct. Thats why my becoming a hermit, while I have not decided to yet is looking better as time goes by for me.
So what you are saying by becoming a hermit is that you don’t want to help the less fortunate, you just want the rest of us to.
 
Code:
It is just that those who bend the knee to their gods are so blinded they can’t see the other who is in anguish. Makes me think of the story of Lazarus, the very poor brother.
Actually it is those who are blinded by their own plight who do not see suffering in others and wish to burden those around them with their own personal suffering.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top