No One Has a Right to Health Care

[Maryland Patriot]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child, evidently as it is, we already had to foot the bill for the birth since they obviously have no coverage.
and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?
It all comes down to personal responsibility, either you have it, or you dont.

 

[Arianrhod]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

 

[Arianrhod]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

Nope. I see your Drama Queen act for what it is...a complete lack of understanding of how things work in the Real World. Entertaining, but rather pathetic.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

Nope. I see your Drama Queen act for what it is...a complete lack of understanding of how things work in the Real World. Entertaining, but rather pathetic.

my drama queen act? arent you the one killing new borns and kidney patients because I would rather feed my family that pay for another moocher to live?

 

[Arianrhod]

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

Nope. I see your Drama Queen act for what it is...a complete lack of understanding of how things work in the Real World. Entertaining, but rather pathetic.

my drama queen act? arent you the one killing new borns and kidney patients because I would rather feed my family that pay for another moocher to live?

So newborns and dialysis patients are "moochers," Drama Queen? Say more about this.

 

[Rustic]

Pocket change compared to socialist entitlement programs. Dumbass

 

[Rustic]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

Shit happens, that's life. Bed wetter

 

[emilynghiem]

A right to healthcare would seem to improve life and pursuit of happiness. As they say "two out of three ain't bad".

Dear konradv
Wouldn't that depend on how it's done?
If your right to health care means you and your peers take responsibility for making sure your costs and demands are covered, so nothing is wasted and nobody is neglected are harmed, FINE.

But if your version of right to health care means MAKING OTHER PEOPLE PAY FOR YOUR RULES,
that causes MISERY -- ie "taxation without representation is TYRANNY"

This is like saying slavery is necessary in order for the owners to profit.
Great for the happiness of the owner, but what about the happiness of the slaves providing the labor?

 

[emilynghiem]

No One Has a Right to Health Care
by Jacob G. Hornberger February 3, 2016

Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders says that everyone has a right to health care. Unfortunately, none of his presidential opponents, Democrat or Republican, is going to challenge him on the point. They’re too scared that they’d lose votes by challenging a standard socialist shibboleth in America.

Sanders’ assertion only goes to show how American socialists (i.e., progressives) have warped and perverted the concept of rights within the minds of the American people. The fact is that no one has a right to health care any more than he has a right to a home, a car, food, spouse, or anything else.

The correct concept of rights was enunciated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, the document that Americans ironically celebrate every Fourth of July. Jefferson observed that people have been endowed with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Reminds me of that "clever" crack of Reagan's about abortion, "I notice that everyone who's for abortion has already been born."

I notice everyone who's against healthcare for everyone else has no objection to taking care of themselves. Do any of them ever wonder what would have happened if their mothers hadn't had access to prenatal care, much less a safe delivery? What if they hadn't been able to see a doctor when they were growing up?

How many anti-vaxxers were vaccinated themselves growing up?

How many had access to dentists and eye doctors and hearing tests when they were growing up and would deny those things to others now?

Why do so many Americans want to replace "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" with "Mine, mine, mine, gimme, gimme, gimme"?

Dear Arianrhod
How much of America's advantages economically were based on slave labor?
Today, how much of our economy depends on slave labor and nonliving wages?

So you are saying 'as long as people BENEFIT from how these products and services
were made affordable' then we should NOT question or try to change how the labor is provided?

We shouldn't strive for fair trade, because "what if that means we could not afford or access goods as we do now"?

Arianrhod what's wrong with taking the end goal of everyone having access to affordable
sustainable services,
but shifting it where it is supported by the local economy and participants per region.
So there is no need to FEAR that the cost has to be mandated against taxpayers' income
in order to afford equal access.

I mentioned before ideas such as reforming the prison system, reforming the VA, collecting and reinvesting resources owed to taxpayers in order to provide longterm services on a renewable basis.

Why this either or business? Why not take the best of all systems, and find a way to keep the parts that work for people while fixing just the parts causing conflicts so all ideas are included.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

Nope. I see your Drama Queen act for what it is...a complete lack of understanding of how things work in the Real World. Entertaining, but rather pathetic.

my drama queen act? arent you the one killing new borns and kidney patients because I would rather feed my family that pay for another moocher to live?

So newborns and dialysis patients are "moochers," Drama Queen? Say more about this.

The parents must be. If they don't have enough money to afford a newborn medical treatment, we have Medicaid for that. And we know that the parents have insurance because DumBama said his plan will make sure everybody does.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This is why socialism never works, no one takes responsibility for themselves.

What responsibility should a newborn have for his congenital heart defect?

What responsibility should a 40-year-old who's led a healthy life have for his kidney failure?

Why don't you ever have answers for those things?

oh this is too easy.
the newborn should have parents that cared enough to make sure there was insurance before having the child

And if not, you feel the child should die.

and the 40 year old? why has he or she not purchased health insurance? why wait until something goes wrong and just expect someone else to cover it for him?

Insurers opted out of covering dialysis decades ago. Those costs are covered by Medicaid.

So, you'd end Medicaid, then?

oh no, let me take food off of my families table to take care of every irresponsible person in the country.
the kid isnt going to die, the help will come. Maybe the parents will have to end up making payments to the hospital of a couple hundred a month till its paid off.
But people like you dont see that, you just think that digging in someone elses pocket is the answer

Every time liberals want more government taxpayer goodies, they use the most extreme rare instance they can find.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Let's see. A sick person just may not quite have the energy or resources that a healthy one may, ya think?

Things must be going pretty good for ya, cause you are coming across as seeming to think you are pretty strong. So strong and full of yourself that you believe you are far above ever needing a helping hand. Okay, God bless you! Go spend your money on killing losers.

Proverbs Chapter 8 Verse 12: I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.

Ya think , medical advances may be knowledge of witty inventions? Ya think, God wants that shared with some elite? Or did he state that he is no respecter of persons? His bounty is for all to receive if they only believe. His creation and His blessings is not to be controlled by some self imposed greater than others. So just who is the gatekeeper to the blessings? Are you God?

God helps those who help themselves.

I'm all for charity. I give when I can and many times when I really shouldn't. But there is a difference between one giving of themselves and one being forced to give. Forced charity is not charity at all, forced charity is theft.

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

 

[emilynghiem]

Let's see. A sick person just may not quite have the energy or resources that a healthy one may, ya think?

Things must be going pretty good for ya, cause you are coming across as seeming to think you are pretty strong. So strong and full of yourself that you believe you are far above ever needing a helping hand. Okay, God bless you! Go spend your money on killing losers.

Proverbs Chapter 8 Verse 12: I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.

Ya think , medical advances may be knowledge of witty inventions? Ya think, God wants that shared with some elite? Or did he state that he is no respecter of persons? His bounty is for all to receive if they only believe. His creation and His blessings is not to be controlled by some self imposed greater than others. So just who is the gatekeeper to the blessings? Are you God?

God helps those who help themselves.

I'm all for charity. I give when I can and many times when I really shouldn't. But there is a difference between one giving of themselves and one being forced to give. Forced charity is not charity at all, forced charity is theft.

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

Dear Ray: Imagine if Christians decided that Christian policies saved lives.
No sex outside of marriage, etc.
And started "mandating through govt" that if you choose to have sex outside of marriage you pay fines.
To pay for the children born out of wedlock.

What a mess, everyone would yell that's imposing beliefs through govt!
Yet when the Left imposes their beliefs, it's considered 'secular and fair game'? What?

So this 'right to health care' can be declared "the law of the land" by Democrats pushing it through govt.
But when the "right to life" is defended, no, that's violating separation of church and state.

Why isn't this being called out for what it is:
DISCRIMINATION BY CREED.

When "Right to Life" is struck down, it is argued that freedom of choice is more important, even if lives are lost or risks of damage come with that free choice.

But when "Right to health care" is maintained as a compelling interest of govt,
suddenly "freedom of choice" is not so important, and can be sacrificed for something
as HARMLESS as choosing other means of paying for health care besides insurance.

Free choice of abortion is not to be penalized or regulated by federal govt, or it's overreaching into privacy.
But free choice whether to buy insurance or pay and provide for health care by other means,
that choice is penalized? And regulated where it HAS TO BE INSURANCE or other govt regulated choices.

How is that being penalized and regulated, while the choice of abortion is not?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Let's see. A sick person just may not quite have the energy or resources that a healthy one may, ya think?

Things must be going pretty good for ya, cause you are coming across as seeming to think you are pretty strong. So strong and full of yourself that you believe you are far above ever needing a helping hand. Okay, God bless you! Go spend your money on killing losers.

Proverbs Chapter 8 Verse 12: I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.

Ya think , medical advances may be knowledge of witty inventions? Ya think, God wants that shared with some elite? Or did he state that he is no respecter of persons? His bounty is for all to receive if they only believe. His creation and His blessings is not to be controlled by some self imposed greater than others. So just who is the gatekeeper to the blessings? Are you God?

God helps those who help themselves.

I'm all for charity. I give when I can and many times when I really shouldn't. But there is a difference between one giving of themselves and one being forced to give. Forced charity is not charity at all, forced charity is theft.

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

Dear Ray: Imagine if Christians decided that Christian policies saved lives.
No sex outside of marriage, etc.
And started "mandating through govt" that if you choose to have sex outside of marriage you pay fines.
To pay for the children born out of wedlock.

What a mess, everyone would yell that's imposing beliefs through govt!
Yet when the Left imposes their beliefs, it's considered 'secular and fair game'? What?

So this 'right to health care' can be declared "the law of the land" by Democrats pushing it through govt.
But when the "right to life" is defended, no, that's violating separation of church and state.

Why isn't this being called out for what it is:
DISCRIMINATION BY CREED.

When "Right to Life" is struck down, it is argued that freedom of choice is more important, even if lives are lost or risks of damage come with that free choice.

But when "Right to health care" is maintained as a compelling interest of govt,
suddenly "freedom of choice" is not so important, and can be sacrificed for something
as HARMLESS as choosing other means of paying for health care besides insurance.

Free choice of abortion is not to be penalized or regulated by federal govt, or it's overreaching into privacy.
But free choice whether to buy insurance or pay and provide for health care by other means,
that choice is penalized? And regulated where it HAS TO BE INSURANCE or other govt regulated choices.

How is that being penalized and regulated, while the choice of abortion is not?

Because we've made the mistake of allowing liberals to define what terms and words mean.

For example, what does a fair share mean? A fair share to a liberal is what they think is fair. What you or I think fair is doesn't count. What you and I think fair means is everybody paying the same thing. Fair means equal.

A right. What is a right? Well a right is your ability to have or participate in something without the government stopping you; well........that's our definition: A right to free speech, a right to work at a job, a right to not have your personal property searched by the government without a warrant. Now, liberals added a new definition to the word "right." A right now is something you want even if somebody else has to pay for it. And if you don't want somebody else being forced to pay for something, you are denying a liberal their right.

Going to the abortion issue, why is it allowed? It's allowed because liberals have determined that life doesn't start until a baby takes it's first breath. Prior to that, it's just a mass of gunk that has no protection because it's not a living being. Liberals are even allowed to define what a life is.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Let's see. A sick person just may not quite have the energy or resources that a healthy one may, ya think?

Things must be going pretty good for ya, cause you are coming across as seeming to think you are pretty strong. So strong and full of yourself that you believe you are far above ever needing a helping hand. Okay, God bless you! Go spend your money on killing losers.

Proverbs Chapter 8 Verse 12: I wisdom dwell with prudence, and find out knowledge of witty inventions.

Ya think , medical advances may be knowledge of witty inventions? Ya think, God wants that shared with some elite? Or did he state that he is no respecter of persons? His bounty is for all to receive if they only believe. His creation and His blessings is not to be controlled by some self imposed greater than others. So just who is the gatekeeper to the blessings? Are you God?

God helps those who help themselves.

I'm all for charity. I give when I can and many times when I really shouldn't. But there is a difference between one giving of themselves and one being forced to give. Forced charity is not charity at all, forced charity is theft.

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

Dear Ray: Imagine if Christians decided that Christian policies saved lives.
No sex outside of marriage, etc.
And started "mandating through govt" that if you choose to have sex outside of marriage you pay fines.
To pay for the children born out of wedlock.

What a mess, everyone would yell that's imposing beliefs through govt!
Yet when the Left imposes their beliefs, it's considered 'secular and fair game'? What?

So this 'right to health care' can be declared "the law of the land" by Democrats pushing it through govt.
But when the "right to life" is defended, no, that's violating separation of church and state.

Why isn't this being called out for what it is:
DISCRIMINATION BY CREED.

When "Right to Life" is struck down, it is argued that freedom of choice is more important, even if lives are lost or risks of damage come with that free choice.

But when "Right to health care" is maintained as a compelling interest of govt,
suddenly "freedom of choice" is not so important, and can be sacrificed for something
as HARMLESS as choosing other means of paying for health care besides insurance.

Free choice of abortion is not to be penalized or regulated by federal govt, or it's overreaching into privacy.
But free choice whether to buy insurance or pay and provide for health care by other means,
that choice is penalized? And regulated where it HAS TO BE INSURANCE or other govt regulated choices.

How is that being penalized and regulated, while the choice of abortion is not?

Because we've made the mistake of allowing liberals to define what terms and words mean.

For example, what does a fair share mean? A fair share to a liberal is what they think is fair. What you or I think fair is doesn't count. What you and I think fair means is everybody paying the same thing. Fair means equal.

A right. What is a right? Well a right is your ability to have or participate in something without the government stopping you; well........that's our definition: A right to free speech, a right to work at a job, a right to not have your personal property searched by the government without a warrant. Now, liberals added a new definition to the word "right." A right now is something you want even if somebody else has to pay for it. And if you don't want somebody else being forced to pay for something, you are denying a liberal their right.

Going to the abortion issue, why is it allowed? It's allowed because liberals have determined that life doesn't start until a baby takes it's first breath. Prior to that, it's just a mass of gunk that has no protection because it's not a living being. Liberals are even allowed to define what a life is.

Its interesting that when it comes to abortion the fetus is not a living being worthy of life until its outside of its mother, yet the liberals insist on pre-natal care being part of the coverage.
Why should we pay money to cover a blob of cells that has no rights.

 

[Jantje_Smit]

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

Right, healthcare should be provided by the holy free market, that's always the best solution

Except if you're poor of course, then you should just die

 

[rightwinger]

Interesting perspective

Are you in any way equating saving people's lives to slavery?

No, merely pointing out that just because the people want something doesn't mean that government is obliged to give us that something.

Maybe down the road, most people will want the government to give them an in-ground swimming pool. Is that the role of government because we the people want it? Maybe we will get so sick of supporting prisoners because they were selling illegal recreational narcotics, so we the people decide such activity should be penalized by death. Or maybe our death penalty is too easy and not enough satisfaction for the family of the victim, so we put people to death by tying them up and beating them with a bat.

You keep digging deeper and deeper

Now it is wanting a swimming pool is the equivalent of wanting to live

Sure. They both require what the people want, don't they?

You're the one that said if you accept being an American, you must accept all the decisions We The People want. Or are you trying to avoid telling me that it only works for what YOU want and not all the people?

People want to live?

And you equate that to people want to swim?

Again you avoid the comparisons; I can't blame you.

What is modern healthcare? Modern healthcare is a way to cheat God out of days he didn't want to give you on this planet. It's not a necessity, it's an option. What did people do before we had modern medical technology? They died. That's it.

But because we have modern health technology now doesn't mean that somebody else should go to work and pay for it so you can live longer than you naturally should have.

And like I posted, if we think everybody should have free healthcare, then everybody should pay for free healthcare. It should be done so we all pay regardless of income.

I'm sorry, but I have to say it

That is one of the most callous ridiculous posts I have read in months

What is modern healthcare? Modern healthcare is a way to cheat God out of days he didn't want to give you on this planet. It's not a necessity, it's an option. What did people do before we had modern medical technology? They died. That's it.

You actually want to tell someone suffering from cancer or heart disease ....too bad for you, 20 years ago you would have been dead....suck it up because I sure don't want to help you

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Government is too corrupt to handle medical care. There always has to be ulterior motives. Commie Care was not about making sure everybody had insurance, Commie Care was designed to make as many government dependents as possible. Congrats, it worked. According to the White House, we created 14 million more government dependents thanks to Commie Care, and the government will be canceling income tax refund checks (or greatly reducing) to millions of Americans who desperately need their own money back.

Right, healthcare should be provided by the holy free market, that's always the best solution

Except if you're poor of course, then you should just die

Or get a job.

 

[rightwinger]

Everyone has a right to earn their healthcare, meaning like with everything else there is no free lunch.

So why did Wall Street get a free lunch with zero interest rates?
Oh by the way, that is why they are now throwing up all over themselves. Jeeez, they have to now pay .25 %

So if someone does not earn the $100,000 it costs for ten days in a hospital, they deserve to die?

write your check and save them.

So it appears that Patriots support allowing poor people to die

Some Patriot

I support their right to buy health insurance and leave me my money to take care of my own family.
By doing this, I or my family does not become a burden on the rest of society.

Screw you....I got mine

Conservative mantra