Is Health Care a Right?

Q. · Jan 31, 2003

*clap, clap, clap, clap*

JMP · Jan 31, 2003

I keep reading these posts and wondering.....

Is society not judged by how it treats its most vunrable?

So many of the posts I have read are so disheartening.... they are full of greed, self indulgence , and reams and reams of argument about how if people can't look after themselves ( and I presume it means the downtrodden, poverty stricken, sick, children, old, etc) then it is just too damn bad. These damn sick children, these stupid disease ridden people made "bad choices". How in the world can any of you..... be expected to care about......them?

Meanwhile, every fricken minute Bush is on the tube, banging the war drum..... ready to spend BILLIONS on war. Don't any of you have a problem with that??

Kevin- I read your messages carefully and still believe that health care is a right. IT should be a right to all citizens in all civilized societies.

Sally_ICURN · Jan 31, 2003

Originally posted by JMP
Meanwhile, every fricken minute Bush is on the tube, banging the war drum..... ready to spend BILLIONS on war. Don't any of you have a problem with that??

Absolutely, positively, no doubt about it. To go off topic for a moment...I wonder about Bush..I mean when was the last time we heard the name Osama Bin Laden from Bush's voicebox? I think this whole Iraq thing is an attempt to distract us from the failures in Afghanistan. If we do go to war with Iraq, and I'm pretty sure we will, it is going to be US paying to "rebuild" what WE have destroyed (and we should) while our OWN people right here at home continue to suffer.

fergus51 · Feb 1, 2003

JMP, I think there is a difference between people who have no compassion and people who are tired of seeing resources used by those who CHOOSE not to contribute. I really don't think Suzy or Kevin or any other poster here are horrible, heartless people. It sounds like they are tired of the same things I am. It doesn't make me heartless or greedy. Waste needs to be decreased. Compassion without any concern for economics is as bad as someone whose only concern is economics.

I just think they are wrong and economically it makes more sense to supply basic care to everyone somehow. Compassion can't be the only argument in favor of universal health care or it will never happen.

Q. · Feb 1, 2003

Thank you Fergus.

Someone please explain to me why just because I don't believe in paying everyone's way for every flippin' thing in life, that suddenly translates to me being selfish and greedy.

If making more money so I can pay for my education so I can continue to be a nurse in our world, if volunteering my time for free, (yes, free) healthcare services in which I've had people STEAL from me, and if wanting to save more of my money so I can fund my children's education is greedy in your eyes - so be it! No one else has taken care of me or given me anything! If I don't, no one will!

So, you determine my compassion by dollar amounts? Are you guys really that shallow? Thee who contributes the most in dollars gets to go to heaven? C'mon. Compassion in my eyes is not handing out money. That's the easy part. Compassion is giving a damn and wanting to help others help themselves. Writing out a check and walking away doesn't accomplish that.

fergus51 · Feb 1, 2003

Susy, I think the conservatives and liberals are having a different argument on this thread. I would wager that BOTH groups favor the idea of everyone contributing and everyone benefitting from health care, and that both groups would like to see the money they pay for healthcare and in taxes better managed. Instead, the thread has become "But what about the poor salt of the earth working class man who loses his job?" and "Well, I ain't paying for the crack whore who shot out 16 kids". Really looking at the same thing from different angles.

researchrabbit · Feb 1, 2003

Originally posted by fergus51
I think the conservatives and liberals are having a different argument on this thread. I would wager that BOTH groups favor the idea of everyone contributing and everyone benefitting from health care, and that both groups would like to see the money they pay for healthcare and in taxes better managed. Instead, the thread has become "But what about the poor salt of the earth working class man who loses his job?" and "Well, I ain't paying for the crack whore who shot out 16 kids". Really looking at the same thing from different angles.

Fergus, that is just what I was thinking! :) Thanks.

fergus51 · Feb 1, 2003

No, thank you. Unfortunately the common themes always seem to be ignored in favor of the flaming (and I know I do it too....)

kmchugh · Feb 1, 2003

JMP

First, let me refer you back to my post, #217 on this thread. If you don't want to go back and read it, lets just recap, shall we?

You wrote:

"So many of the posts I have read are so disheartening.... they are full of greed, self indulgence , and reams and reams of argument about how if people can't look after themselves ( and I presume it means the downtrodden, poverty stricken, sick, children, old, etc) then it is just too damn bad. These damn sick children, these stupid disease ridden people made "bad choices". How in the world can any of you..... be expected to care about......them?"

Name calling. Again, the last refuge of those without defense of their beliefs. You have no response to the logical, defined arguments laid out here by myself, Susy and others except to stoop to name calling. The fact is I am not greedy, I am not self indulgent. I am simply sick of bleeding heart liberals coming up with social program after social program for those "less fortunate" than I, then pointing at ME to pay for those social programs. You will dip ever deeper into the pockets of those who have striven to get ahead so that those who have not won't feel left behind. Don't even get me started on "what about the poor, sick children." That drum has been beaten to death, and your sole answer is to call me greedy and self indulgent for wanting to provide a better life for my own children. Were I of the same stripe, I would call you falsely pious, holier than thou, and sanctimonious for even proposing the argument.

Allow me to ask you a question I have posed several times, which is still unanswered. Where does it end? When have I given enough to those less fortunate than I, and when can I say I want something left for me and my family without being accused of being greedy, cold hearted, or selfish? Or does that point never come? Do entitlements, and my required contribution for those entitlements spin ever higher, until I am required to turn over everything I earn in the name of making a better life for those less fortunate than me? Whose responsibility is it then to provide a better life for me and my family?

I will repeat a sentiment that I ended the post to which I referred you to. The fact that I am sick of providing more and more for everyone in this country but my own family does not make me greedy or self indulgent. The fact that you would accuse me of such does, however, speak volumes about you.

"Meanwhile, every fricken minute Bush is on the tube, banging the war drum..... ready to spend BILLIONS on war. Don't any of you have a problem with that??"

Non-sequitor. You are comparing apples to oranges, but if it helps, think of it this way. Perhaps Bush is preparing for war so that all of us in the US, the "haves" and the "have nots" can feel a little more secure, a little safer. Perhaps he is preparing for war so that we can feel that those who would fly planes into our buildings, and those who would support them (and yes, there has been overwhelming evidence, published in the open press, that Iraq supported and continues to support Bin Laden's organization) have been brought to justice. Perhaps he is sending a message to others who would emulate the terrorists of 9/11 that the cost of such actions will be prohibitively high to you, your family, and all who support you.

"Kevin- I read your messages carefully and still believe that health care is a right. IT should be a right to all citizens in all civilized societies."

Translation: "I don't care what evidence you present to support your arguments, I don't care how unsupportable my arguments are. I will never change my beliefs."

Now, you tell me. Who is closed minded?

Kevin McHugh

kmchugh · Feb 1, 2003

I realized after finishing my last post, I wanted to post a bit more about "every fricken minute Bush is on the tube, banging the war drum..... ready to spend BILLIONS on war." Allow me to say why I support Bush, and I plan to make it as personal as a punch in the mouth.

I'm glad we are going to remove Saddam, because I, and all those I consider to be my peers in healthcare (which includes everyone on this board) can go to work and feel a little more secure that some fanatical Muslim terrorist supported by Saddam isn't going to blow up the hospital where we work. That terrorist isn't going to release Sarin, produced in an Iraqi chemical plant, into our hospital.

I'm glad we are going to remove Saddam, because I can feel a bit more secure that my three year old daughter isn't going to contract anthrax and die from a strain developed and grown in an Iraqi laboratory, then given to a Bin Laden operative to release in the US.

If being glad about this makes me a hawk, then fit me for my wings and talons right now. If YOU don't like it, if you don't like my "banging the war drum," tough. I could not possibly care less.

Kevin McHugh

cmggriff · Feb 1, 2003

No, health care is not a right. Gary

Q. · Feb 1, 2003

Kevin,

My hands are getting sore from clapping.