Can you be a truly good Christian, yet be against universal healthcare?

[Care4all]

From Matthew, Chapter 25:

35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’​

If you want to read that in a hyper-technical manner, Christians who visit the sick, but let them die for lack of treatment are off the hook. But the last sentence means that any mistreatment of the poor including letting them die is the same as doing it to Christ.

Without knowing the Bible, i can see how maybe you would think this could be a hyper-technical acception, but I can assure you that it is NOT. the reason I say this is that there are passages and parables from Jesus himself, that also go in to things like, What good is it if you go to a poor man's house and wish him well and for God to be with him and Bless him, while you then procede to walk out without leaving them any food?

So, Jesus addressed that situation already, and it can not be used as you speculated, for ANY Christian....


hmmmmm, maybe i need to read further up in to the thread to really understand the point you were trying to make? Sorry, if i misinterpreted it?

Care

 

[Care4all]

I think we need to ALL face the fact that we have got some pretty serious problems in our healthcare system and this is..... that it is getting to the point where it is financially prohibitive, for both individuals and for Businesses to supply and for our government to pay for it as well, with things like medicare for the boomers to come and ever growing medicaid as more and more can't afford it at all.

The answer is not necessarily in a Universal Plan where the gvt cuts out the insurance companies, though i personally feel this would get rid of alot of middle man waste...moreso than any other reform we could put in place....

HOWEVER, at the same time, this could be what reduces the incentive for the healthcare industry to pursue their advances at the same rate....some say?

I guess what i am trying to say is that the sooner both opposing sides on this issue are willing to compromise in order for something to really be done, the better imo....in order to help the situation, without bankrupting the government, the companies, or the individuals through being "Tax strapped".

Care

 

[Dogger]

hmmmmm, maybe i need to read further up in to the thread to really understand the point you were trying to make? Sorry, if i misinterpreted it?

Care

You did, but no apology is necessary. Sarcasm (which you highlighted in bold) doesn't always come across that clearly.

And the rest of your post bolstered my point, so thanks for the assist.

 

[jreeves]

Neither Manifold nor Jreeves in their replies face the fundamental position posed by the golden rule, they both bring up extraneous assumptions.

So then I guess we do have an answer, if one is a true Christian, and believes in the golden rule and would like healthcare, as I'm sure everyone would, then Yes, to be a genuine Christian you would have to support universal healthcare. Not to would be hypocritical.

Simpleton, simple answers aren't for complex problems. The government doesn't need to spend itself into bankruptcy and destroy the country to solve the problems with the lack of healthcare coverage in this country. That's plain simple......

 

[jreeves]

From Matthew, Chapter 25:

35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’​

If you want to read that in a hyper-technical manner, Christians who visit the sick, but let them die for lack of treatment are off the hook. But the last sentence means that any mistreatment of the poor including letting them die is the same as doing it to Christ.

Where does that state Chistians should fund an inefficient government ran system? Wouldn't Christ won't you to fund an efficient non-profit? As matter of fact if you throw your money in an inefficient government ran system, that wastes 25% of its funds, you may be guilty of doing it to Christ.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I think we need to ALL face the fact that we have got some pretty serious problems in our healthcare system and this is..... that it is getting to the point where it is financially prohibitive, for both individuals and for Businesses to supply and for our government to pay for it as well, with things like medicare for the boomers to come and ever growing medicaid as more and more can't afford it at all.

The answer is not necessarily in a Universal Plan where the gvt cuts out the insurance companies, though i personally feel this would get rid of alot of middle man waste...moreso than any other reform we could put in place....

HOWEVER, at the same time, this could be what reduces the incentive for the healthcare industry to pursue their advances at the same rate....some say?

I guess what i am trying to say is that the sooner both opposing sides on this issue are willing to compromise in order for something to really be done, the better imo....in order to help the situation, without bankrupting the government, the companies, or the individuals through being "Tax strapped".

Care

One of the fastest growing and BIGGEST threats to medical care is outrageous Insurance costs brought on by ignorant claims being approved by Juries to pay for stupid shit. A certain Democrat comes to mind who has helped this problem along.

There are places in this country that certain types of doctors simply do not practice because of the threat of claims with no basis in fact being brought against them and bankrupting them. Not because the claims have merit but because Juries buy into the concept that big pockets exists to pay for everything.

Edwards has spawned cases that out right idiotic. Claims that birth defects are in fact not birth defects in some cases. Ruining Doctors that deliver babies. Making insurance cost prohibitive. And curtailing service from those doctors in areas where the Government will not protect them with Tort reform.

We need to rein in the ambulance chasers and chareleton Lawyers that take these cases and covince Juries that deep pockets can pay for anything, playing on the Juries sympathy not the facts.

 

[midcan5]

Personally I do not expect YOU to pay for my son's health care so why should I pay for yours?

Again that is an assumption a sot of begging the question, personally, we aren't talking about you if it is within you to stop thinking of yourself for a minute.

 

[midcan5]

Simpleton, simple answers aren't for complex problems. The government doesn't need to spend itself into bankruptcy and destroy the country to solve the problems with the lack of healthcare coverage in this country. That's plain simple......

That's interesting as now it is a complex question and we can't answer complex questions with simple moral goodness. Let's see, rewrite, do unto others in all cases except those that are complex.....

We can kill with billions, can we care with the same billions.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Again that is an assumption a sot of begging the question, personally, we aren't talking about you if it is within you to stop thinking of yourself for a minute.

Universal Health Care does NOT work. It lowers the health of everyone in the system. It destroys incentive for research and medicine creation. It marginalizes Doctors and cuts off know procedures for whole swaths of the population.

 

[midcan5]

Universal Health Care does NOT work. It lowers the health of everyone in the system. It destroys incentive for research and medicine creation. It marginalizes Doctors and cuts off know procedures for whole swaths of the population.

Lets check that out with a call to Denmark:
Hello
Hello
Does universal healthcare work?
Yes
Thanks.

 

[Dogger]

We will only get an inefficient system if obstructionists in your party participate. The GOP tries to make government fail to bolster their ideology at the expense of human beings.

One more time - I advocate a system that replaces the insurance companies and leaves medical professionals alone. Medicare for all.

 

[midcan5]

We will only get an inefficient system if obstructionists in your party participate. The GOP tries to make government fail to bolster their ideology at the expense of human beings.

One more time - I advocate a system that replaces the insurance companies and leaves medical professionals alone. Medicare for all.

Agreed. And isn't it ironic that the European nations, those heathens, are more Christian than our homegrown flavor.

 

[Dogger]

Agreed. And isn't it ironic that the European nations, those heathens, are more Christian than our homegrown flavor.

It's also ironic that right-wingers think we are superior to the French when that nation has accomplished something the right says is beyond our abilities - universal healthcare.

 

[Gungnir]

And riots in the street whenever the imported third world gets their sensitivities hurt.

 

[jreeves]

We will only get an inefficient system if obstructionists in your party participate. The GOP tries to make government fail to bolster their ideology at the expense of human beings.

One more time - I advocate a system that replaces the insurance companies and leaves medical professionals alone. Medicare for all.

Great Medicare for all.

CAGW's criticism came in response to a report issued a day earlier by the trustees who monitor the fiscal health of Medicare and Social Security. The trustees estimate the fund for hospital bills in the Medicare program will run dry by 2019, seven years sooner than predicted last year, largely thanks to the new Medicare bill. Medicare begins dipping into its trust fund for the first time this year.

"Politicians in Washington ignored this problem for several decades, and then they make it worse by adding a costly prescription drug benefit," CAGW President Tom Schatz said. "The retirement of the baby boomers will spell fiscal doom for older and younger generations alike."

"Medicare's own trustees have confirmed what taxpayer advocates warned about all along," agreed John Berthoud, president of the National Taxpayers Union (NTU). "A 35 percent increase in the drug plan's 10-year cost estimate, mounting evidence that employers will dump seniors' private coverage, and now [the] trustees' report all add up to an economic doomsday scenario that thoughtful policymakers can't ignore any longer."

Berthoud noted full federal drug coverage will go into effect in 2006, thus "lawmakers have only a limited amount of time to prevent what could be the biggest fiscal disaster in U.S. history."

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14901

 

[jreeves]

It's also ironic that right-wingers think we are superior to the French when that nation has accomplished something the right says is beyond our abilities - universal healthcare.

Yeah, I know we actually want to see our country remain fiscally solvent and be able to get medical care when we need it. We want to be able have an MRI when we need one. We want to be able to see specialist when we need them.....such a crazy notion.

 

[Dogger]

Thanks for making my point about the GOP sabotaging good legislation, even if you did not mean to help.

The prescription drug benefit was added by the GOP Congress in 2006 in an effort to hijack the issue from the Democrats and stem the subsequent carnage of the 2006 mid-term elections. It's most controversial provision, as demanded by the Republicans, prevented the federal program from negotiating with Big Pharma for lower prices.

Who sold out the taxpayers? Former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.) as chair of the Congressional committee overseeing the new law, “worked hard to prohibit Medicare from negotiating with drug companies to achieve lower prices for seniors.” Tauzin is now the president of PhRMA, the drug manufacturing lobby, and inserted that language into the drug benefit bill at the same time he was negotiating his current $2 million per year job. In exchange for his own $2 million per year job, Tauzin stuck American taxpayers with a provision that costs an extra $80 billion annually.

Do you think the drug lobby got their money’s worth from Republican Tauzin? A 40,000 to 1 return on their investment looks pretty sweet to me.

Tauzin was not the only corrupt Republican pissing in this pool. “Former Medicare chief Thomas Scully also receives scrutiny in the report. Scully received an "ethics waiver" from the Bush administration permitting him to hunt for his next job while actively negotiating Part D on behalf of the administration. He immediately left the administration to become a health industry lobbyist.”

Public interest groups call for corruption investigation into prescription drug law

 

[jreeves]

Thanks for making my point about the GOP sabotaging good legislation, even if you did not mean to help.

The prescription drug benefit was added by the GOP Congress in 2006 in an effort to hijack the issue from the Democrats and stem the subsequent carnage of the 2006 mid-term elections. It's most controversial provision, as demanded by the Republicans, prevented the federal program from negotiating with Big Pharma for lower prices.

Who sold out the taxpayers? Former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.) as chair of the Congressional committee overseeing the new law, “worked hard to prohibit Medicare from negotiating with drug companies to achieve lower prices for seniors.” Tauzin is now the president of PhRMA, the drug manufacturing lobby, and inserted that language into the drug benefit bill at the same time he was negotiating his current $2 million per year job. In exchange for his own $2 million per year job, Tauzin stuck American taxpayers with a provision that costs an extra $80 billion annually.

Do you think the drug lobby got their money’s worth from Republican Tauzin? A 40,000 to 1 return on their investment looks pretty sweet to me.

Tauzin was not the only corrupt Republican pissing in this pool. “Former Medicare chief Thomas Scully also receives scrutiny in the report. Scully received an "ethics waiver" from the Bush administration permitting him to hunt for his next job while actively negotiating Part D on behalf of the administration. He immediately left the administration to become a health industry lobbyist.”

Public interest groups call for corruption investigation into prescription drug law

Our government is inefficient, believe it's all the Republicans if you want, that's irrelevant. Our government wastes 25% of tax money that's a fact. If you want to think it's all the Republicans your very misguided. Most people wouldn't subscribe to a government ran program that wastes 25% regardless if they are enlisted in the Democratic or Republican party. Do I really need to show that Democrats waste taxpayer money or do you have common sense?

 

[Dogger]

"believe it's all the Republicans if you want"

I never said that. Your perception of me comes from your determination to attribute to me things I never said. That reflects on you, not me.

I don't believe life will be perfect if universal healthcare is passed. It's far from that now. I believe we have the ability to devise a better system that will help more people, for the same money, with no loss of service. I think it is unpatriotic to say America is too weak or stupid to do that.

But there are people determine to corrupt and obstruct that objective. And those people are Republicans.

 

[jreeves]

"believe it's all the Republicans if you want"

I never said that. Your perception of me comes from your determination to attribute to me things I never said. That reflects on you, not me.

I don't believe life will be perfect if universal healthcare is passed. It's far from that now. I believe we have the ability to devise a better system that will help more people, for the same money, with no loss of service. I think it is unpatriotic to say America is too weak or stupid to do that.

But there are people determine to corrupt and obstruct that objective. And those people are Republicans.

I notice how you completely blaze right by Medicare's demise or the inefficiency of the government.