4
4
0
The lines have been drawn and the battle is being joined. The Democrats used their majority to give healthcare to the most sympathetic Americans, the one suffering the most debilitating and dangerous diseases and afflictions. The Republicans are taking it away, or so the argument goes. Did the Democrats really give them anything or was it just a promise that couldn't be fulfilled? Are the Republicans taking it away or simply acknowledging the lie behind the promise?
Most who are struggling with costly disease and afflictions argue that We the People have a right to healthcare. Well, they may as well stop arguing. Of course, everyone has a right to healthcare. The real question is do we have the right to free healthcare?
We have the right of free speech, to assemble peacefully, to bear arms. Does that obligate anyone to pay for these things. Must others pay for my Internet access so that I can voice my opinion? Must others pay for my bus ticket to Washington so that I can participate in a demonstration in front of the White House? Must others pay for my weapons and ammunition so that I can defend myself with them? Of course not. So where does the right to healthcare imply that someone else has to pay for it?
Most who are struggling with costly disease and afflictions argue that We the People have a right to healthcare. Well, they may as well stop arguing. Of course, everyone has a right to healthcare. The real question is do we have the right to free healthcare?
We have the right of free speech, to assemble peacefully, to bear arms. Does that obligate anyone to pay for these things. Must others pay for my Internet access so that I can voice my opinion? Must others pay for my bus ticket to Washington so that I can participate in a demonstration in front of the White House? Must others pay for my weapons and ammunition so that I can defend myself with them? Of course not. So where does the right to healthcare imply that someone else has to pay for it?
Posted in these groups: 
Healthcare
Obamacare
Healthcare Obamacare
Edited 8 y ago
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 8
2
2
0
A person exercising one of their rights requires no support from another, beyond tolerance. If you must pay taxes to pay a doctor to provide me with medical care, you are extending a privilege or government benefit to me.
No a person does not have an inalienable right to healthcare.
No a person does not have an inalienable right to healthcare.
(2)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
I agree. However, I'm willing to concede the question because even if we have a right to healthcare, we do not have the power to make someone else pay for it, not more than we have the power to make someone else pay for our guns and ammunition because we have a right to keep and bear arms.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is where the libertarian in my starts having problems with the socialist in me.
We don't have a right to healthcare. No one deserves to be treated for their afflictions simply for being alive. To expect others to pay for that through government force leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But at the same time, a society should be able to look after the healthcare of its people. There's no reason why we can have all of these taxes and not use it to leverage better, affordable, or even free healthcare for society.
The right to live is a human right we should all support right along side speech. Extending the lives of others should be something we should all support. Should we all be forced to pay for the life extensions of others we'd rather not? I don't know. I tend to think so.
We don't have a right to healthcare. No one deserves to be treated for their afflictions simply for being alive. To expect others to pay for that through government force leaves a bad taste in my mouth. But at the same time, a society should be able to look after the healthcare of its people. There's no reason why we can have all of these taxes and not use it to leverage better, affordable, or even free healthcare for society.
The right to live is a human right we should all support right along side speech. Extending the lives of others should be something we should all support. Should we all be forced to pay for the life extensions of others we'd rather not? I don't know. I tend to think so.
(1)
(0)
CPT Jack Durish
You're conflicted. That's obvious. Well only fools look at issues from one side only.
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
CPT Jack Durish True. But to champion both causes is schizophrenic. Is there not a way to preserve the liberties of everyone while at the same time providing healthcare to everyone? I don't think our government or the people are equipped to handle this issue responsibly.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
NOT to FREE Healthcare that we force the taxpayers, or simply other people from that same insurance carrier who will pay higher premiums because the Preexisting Condition requirement is nothing more than ordering the insurance company to pay for treatment that they know from day one is going to possibly run into the millions of dollars.
It is tantamount to robbery. I say return to what we had before including the LOWER premiums, and then let people make their choice. If they choose a boat over health insurance, then that is not my problem.
It is tantamount to robbery. I say return to what we had before including the LOWER premiums, and then let people make their choice. If they choose a boat over health insurance, then that is not my problem.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google