Healthcare is a privilege or a right?

oneforall57 · Post by **oneforall57** » Sat Oct 23, 2010 12:06 pm

As a society we need to have unity. Does leaving healthcare coverage in private hand count as unity?
I watched my mother-in-law die of cancer for two years while she could not afford to be in a private club of proper health coverage. It was a nightmare to deal with!
The www.americanchristiansociety.com says it is wrong to leave healthcare in private hands...
So I guess my question is: Should healthcare coverage be a society thing or private hands?

flitzerbiest · Post by **flitzerbiest** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 3:41 pm

mormon boy51 wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
mormon boy51 wrote: This one question won't solve the whole issue of health care but i think it is a privilege based on one reason. Yes, everyone should have health care, but we shouldn't force them to pay for it. If a certain person doesn't want health care (God help them) then they shouldn't have to pay for it. That's why I tend to go with a privilege.

Your one reason is fallacious. Take voting for example. It is the right of every citizen to vote. Thus, the state has an obligation to provide ballots, voting stations etc, at public expense. Yes, everyone should vote, but if they don't they should still have to pay for it. The same with basic health care. It should be, in my opinion, available to all, regardless of ability to pay. Yes, some will choose to not avail themselves of this right. That does not make it any less a right.
This issue is very complicated. First, shouldn't we decide what makes something a right? (Your right my reason was fallacious, so now im trying to determine the truth.)

The DoI specifically enumerates a right to life, and the Constitution expresses that promotion of the general welfare is among the main functions of our government. In the days of the founders, the understanding of what promotes health and wellbeing was, relatively speaking, poorly understood. At this point, we now have sufficient knowledge upon which we can and ought to act.

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:00 pm

flitzerbiest wrote:
mormon boy51 wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
mormon boy51 wrote: This one question won't solve the whole issue of health care but i think it is a privilege based on one reason. Yes, everyone should have health care, but we shouldn't force them to pay for it. If a certain person doesn't want health care (God help them) then they shouldn't have to pay for it. That's why I tend to go with a privilege.

Your one reason is fallacious. Take voting for example. It is the right of every citizen to vote. Thus, the state has an obligation to provide ballots, voting stations etc, at public expense. Yes, everyone should vote, but if they don't they should still have to pay for it. The same with basic health care. It should be, in my opinion, available to all, regardless of ability to pay. Yes, some will choose to not avail themselves of this right. That does not make it any less a right.
This issue is very complicated. First, shouldn't we decide what makes something a right? (Your right my reason was fallacious, so now im trying to determine the truth.)
The DoI specifically enumerates a right to life, and the Constitution expresses that promotion of the general welfare is among the main functions of our government. In the days of the founders, the understanding of what promotes health and wellbeing was, relatively speaking, poorly understood. At this point, we now have sufficient knowledge upon which we can and ought to act.

Maybe, but how do we interpret it? Back then, they had no knowledge of medicine like we do today. It was a completely different situation. We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.

flitzerbiest · Post by **flitzerbiest** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:10 pm

mormon boy51 wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.

Oh the irony!!

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:14 pm

flitzerbiest wrote:
mormon boy51 wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.
Oh the irony!!

Whats so ironic?

LiamOS · Post by **LiamOS** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:17 pm

[color=green]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:
[color=cyan]flitzerbiest[/color] wrote:
[color=red]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.
Oh the irony!!
Whats so ironic?

If I'm not mistaken, he was commenting on the acceptance of the Bible as relevant in aspects of modern life.

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:23 pm

AkiThePirate wrote:
[color=green]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:
[color=cyan]flitzerbiest[/color] wrote:
[color=red]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.
Oh the irony!!
Whats so ironic?
If I'm not mistaken, he was commenting on the acceptance of the Bible as relevant in aspects of modern life.

I dont find the bible relevant to modern life...

flitzerbiest · Post by **flitzerbiest** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:26 pm

mormon boy51 wrote:
AkiThePirate wrote:
[color=green]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:
[color=cyan]flitzerbiest[/color] wrote:
[color=red]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.
Oh the irony!!
Whats so ironic?
If I'm not mistaken, he was commenting on the acceptance of the Bible as relevant in aspects of modern life.
I dont find the bible relevant to modern life...

Insert favorite Holy Book here: __________________

Kuan · Post by **Kuan** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:31 pm

flitzerbiest wrote:
mormon boy51 wrote:
AkiThePirate wrote:
[color=green]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:
[color=cyan]flitzerbiest[/color] wrote:
[color=red]mormon boy51[/color] wrote:We cant make a decision based upon what was written so long ago for something that is very new.
Oh the irony!!
Whats so ironic?
If I'm not mistaken, he was commenting on the acceptance of the Bible as relevant in aspects of modern life.
I dont find the bible relevant to modern life...
Insert favorite Holy Book here: __________________

Well, if you want to discuss mormon theology, Id be glad to.

Now, lets get back to the OP.

whaddduppp · Post by **whaddduppp** » Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:40 pm

I think people should realize how easily the idea of a universal single payer system could factor into their already preconceived ideas of a modern democratic state (such as America). If one is willing to pay for public schools, because education is essential to the sustaining of a reasonable life, this action not disallowing for private (perhaps better) schools, why should not the logic flow easily into the realm of healthcare. Moreover, people have no problem paying for public transit! What this proves i that they agree that the bus is a right owed to the people from their government....but not a doctor?

MyReality · Post by **MyReality** » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:34 pm

The main problem in my mind is that many people do not understand the benefits of a social health care system. Not to mention to many people watch to much T.V. and are unlikely to research about it themselves.

Take into account that if all of Americans puts money into it, then it would be much, much, cheaper then paying health care insurance that may refuse to pay for you bills for not mentioning you had a cold when you were five that potentially led up to the pneumonia at the age of twenty.

I also think that this will be an issue that resolves itself in the next twenty years when even the upper middle class will be unable to pay their insanely high monthly payments for care that may or may not be payed for.

Anyone able to link the comparisons of the increase of inflation to that of increase in monthly health care premiums?