Government Run Health Care Unconstitutional???

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Skull Pilot, Jun 22, 2009.

  1. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,806
    Thanks Received:
    4,497
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,095
    Is Government Health Care Constitutional? - WSJ.com
    And in order to have that say, the government must be privy to your most private information.

    And the answer is that government cannot do any of these things unless it has unprecedented access to your personal information because...

    Are those of you who champion privacy in your personal choices so ready to give it up to guarantee health insurance for not the 46 million people you have been told don't have insurance but for the less than 11 million who are the true uninsured.

    See the breakdown of the government's inflated figures here

    How many uninsured people need additional help from taxpayers? | KeithHennessey.com
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Here is something else you might be interested in Skull, the only group of Americans that have a right to healthcare under the constitution are prisoners....

    Estelle V. Gamble

    These elementary principles establish the government's obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration. An inmate must rely on prison authorities to treat his medical needs; if the authorities fail to do so, those needs will not be met. In the worst cases, such a failure may actually produce physical "torture or a lingering death," In re Kemmler, supra, the evils of most immediate concern to the drafters of the Amendment. In less serious cases, denial of medical care may result in pain and suffering which no one suggests would serve any penological purpose. Cf. Gregg v. Georgia, supra, at 182-183 (joint opinion). The infliction of such unnecessary suffering is inconsistent with contemporary standards of decency as manifested in modern legislation [n8]codifying the common [p104] law view that "it is but just that the public be required to care for the prisoner, who cannot, by reason of the deprivation of his liberty, care for himself

    Estelle v. Gamble
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page