- Thread starter
- #21
The author isn't a "Constitutional Expert" as you claim. He describes himself as a "Political Junkie", nothing more. But that's OK, everyone is entitled to their opinion, myself included.
The article describes John Hancock "mandating" Militia Membership as Gov. of Massachusetts. So we're supposed to believe that State Militia service (Yesterdays National Guard) "mandated" by the Governor in 1790(?) is the basis for allowing the State run Health Care?
Hey, of the 55 Constitutional Convention Attendees, 15 owned large Plantations. Think I could use that as a basis to own slaves? See because if the state "mandates" it, it must be ok!
He did not say that he was a constitutional expert, but I can tell you he knows more about the constitution than you do and a mandate is a mandate period, whether it is the government requiring you to purchase a gun and ammunition at your own expense or one that requires you to purchase a health care plan. It is a state's issue................................. not a federal one period................................
If they government can make healthcare mandatory, then why dont they issue each of us a colt 1911? I mean, the 2nd amendment is in the constitution, but healthcare is not.
Healthcare is mandatory, for if you show up at any emergency room without a dime or an insurance plan you are still taken care of and the taxpayer flips the bill and so do the responsible people with ever increasing insurance premiums. Health care is mandatory as it is called the " hypocratic oath," taken by physicians and health care providers, that a person will not be denied care under any circumstance.
Health care " insurance" is not mandatory. There in lies the problem as insurance is a personal responsibility and one that many are not going to do as they rely on you to pay for it.
Last edited: