Jump to content

Obama healthcare... whats the fuss?


King Rat
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Again there is a separation of Church and State, just because you believe in the Bible and Christ doesn't mean everyone else does.


You can do anything you want in life, provided that you are willing to take responsibility for and suffer the consequences of your poor choices/actions.


Nowhere does it say that you are guaranteed anything, only that you have the opportunity to make things happen depending on what you put into it. What you do with your opportunity should not impact others.

 

I may be wrong, but I think they are just highlighting the hypocrisy of the fact that the majority of those against HCR are in fact christians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
I may be wrong, but I think they are just highlighting the hypocrisy of the fact that the majority of those against HCR are in fact christians.



Why is it hypocritical to be Christian and oppose the current flavor of health care reform? Also, why is it that when engaging in debate about certain issues like stem cell research, homosexuality, or abortion, I am instructed to check my Christian values at the door and not bring them into the debate, yet when it comes to health care, my Christian charity ought to compel me not to give my money to the poor, but to allow the government to take it and trust them to distribute it accordingly? And lastly, how is it that a group of self-proclaimed atheists, agnostics, and pagans can suddenly become experts on how the Christian life ought to be lived?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
in all fairness though, the majority of those for HCR are probably christians too.



the godless liberals!?

you're probably right. I guess it comes down to what you think christ's ultimate message was: hating gays and starting wars vs providing abortions and healthcare for the poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I am a former Catholic, I know all too well the trip laid on people by the Church, "thou shalt not........." but it's ok if the clergy commit horrible crimes.

The individual Christian may have good intentions but the monstrosity of the organization relegates it all to lip service, a way for people to feel better about their shortcomings.

I bailed on the hyprocrisy of organized religion 20 years ago, it's a farce meant to guilt trip and intimidate people into doing what the leaders want, not in following any "word of God", no better than politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I think things get confused when we frame thing as "caring." Even "charity." That's not what this is. This is not charity.


Again, you pay taxes that help build roads in other counties that you won't use. You pay taxes that help rehab people with drug addictions so they can get back on their feet. You pay taxes that keep a police force in place to protect the population. None of that is charity. It's part of living in a society. We share expenses so the populace has fundamental needs met, and rights preserved.


Clearly, since you still live in the USA, you don't have a problem being taxed and having your money go into a pot, to pay for things that you will personally NEVER use.


But when it comes to medical aid, you feel it's unjustified because it should somehow be voluntary, accompanied by overtures of charitable willingness by all. As if WANTING to get people the double-bypass they need makes it more noble, or even valid.


It just doesn't make any sense. I mean, you really feel compelled that your being that a school three counties over needs a new jungle gym, and so you'll continue to give to Caesar what is Caesar's, but you'll be miffed if some of that money could resuscitate an infant, or give a working single mother the emergency breast cancer operation that will get her home to her kids? I'm sorry but it's just not a consistent point of view.



I pay taxes because the government mandates it. I live is this country and by doing so agree to the taxes and laws it imposes, the whole render to Caesar what is Caesar's thing. That is no way signifies I agree with any of them. The private sector is much more charitable and efficient then the government sector. If Katrina proved anything that was it.

I am not "miffed" that money is used to resuscitate a baby. That would be insane, babies are great. Like I said in my last post. The aim is noble. Saving kids is a great goal. What I have a problem with is the insistence that the government is the savior of the people and the only institution capable of providing the baby saving funds. The program addresses none of the real problems. If the bill pases and I continue to live in the United States I will pay the taxes and abide by the laws. Part of living in a country. I just don't think the program is in the best interest of the country in the long run or the short.

Consistent with the founding of this country I feel that while government is great at protecting for liberties it is less then awesome at providing for needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I pay taxes because the government mandates it...babies are great...consistent with the founding of this country I feel that while government is great at protecting for liberties it is less then awesome at providing for needs.



Ok, I hear you. Fair enough!

SO, what do you think would a better option. A neutral non-profit 3rd party org?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Also, why is it that when engaging in debate about certain issues like stem cell research, homosexuality, or abortion, I am instructed to check my Christian values at the door and not bring them into the debate, yet when it comes to health care, my Christian charity ought to compel me not to give my money to the poor, but to allow the government to take it and trust them to distribute it accordingly?

 

As a Christian, I would never suggest you be inconsistent; have a consistent world view.

 

I think it's important though, AS a Christian, to find "other reasons." For example, I'm not a fan of abortion... there are Biblical reasons I guess, but not really. It's silent on the matter. My reasons are based in "rational thought." So in a debate, I have reasons, with support, not faith claims; faith claims have their place, but not in an argument where the opponent doesn't share those claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Ok, I hear you. Fair enough!


SO, what do you think would a better option. A neutral non-profit 3rd party org?



I know this is probably an idealist response. But I really do feel that if there was a change of goals in this country, particularly among the evangelical Christians, and the people were free to act in a manner that they chose, people who needed help would be provided for. Maybe not as quickly as what our President is suggesting but I feel the long term results would be far greater and more beneficial to everyone. 3rd party organizations would be a huge part of it for sure.

I am encouraged by some of the changes I am seeing in the church. Social justice is becoming a greater issue for a lot of Christians. I feel though that this kind of legislation harms that progress as it conditions people to rely on the government rather then the people around them. Probably a side effect of our detached culture. But I do for sure think things are changing for the better in the US, or were. As I said earlier this kind of legislation sets social progress back in my honest opinion.

I'll add that I'm not a natural American I grew up in arguably one of the most liberal sections of Canada, Halifax Nova Scotia. So I like to think I do have some experience with socialized medicine and it's side effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

They had a good point about insurance across state lines too IMHO - if you want lower prices, increase competition. Seems to make sense to me, and I have no idea why they didn't put that into the final bill. Probably due to insurance company lobbying.

Hey Phil. :wave:

 

That did make it in the bill, along with ~400 other republican amendments.

 

Yet the HC bill got absolutely no republican votes. :rolleyes:

 

Here's a list of all of them with a description.

 

Look at McCain 204 - Allows Individuals To Purchase Insurance Across State Lines - State-To-State Portability

 

This is an incomplete list though, as the article that came with the list was posted a year ago.

 

One of the problems with that idea though is that insurance companies use that as a loophole to go to the state with the least amount of regulations. That's why if you watched the healthcare summit Obama explained that they have a modified version of that amendment with extra restrictions to prevent that from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ok, I hear you. Fair enough!


SO, what do you think would a better option. A neutral non-profit 3rd party org?



Yes, a non taxpayer supported entity, that is non-profit as well. This what should have happened, insurance and hospital industries should have been crushed for their practices.

If the Church or other do good/feel good based organizations are true to their values then why are there not more nonprofit hospitals already? People's lives and suffering should not be a billion dollar industry, and insurance is a scam, take and take for years then deny claims when it's time to pay up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

One of my personal favorites is the woman talking about Czars. Czars in america are not a russian czar. Czars were used under Bush and no one bitched about it then. But Obama has czars and WOOOAAAHHHHH!!! COMMUNIST COMMUNIST COMMUNIST.


and that dumbass in the steelers coat talking about how she is set up to handle foreign policy because Russia is right across the street. States do nothing to handle foreign policy. Arizona and Texas are the closest we have, and all they do is catch people crossing illegally. they don't do anything about the policy.



:facepalm::facepalm: I give you the average Glenn Beck/Fox News viewer. WOw the average American really is just {censored}ing dumb. And they can vote. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
That's funny, I got my money through working hard for 25 years, saving, and investing wisely. If someone else squandered the opportunity to make the right decisions in life that's not my problem. Do I think they should suffer, no but they aren't entitled to something that costs anyone else a dime.


You have the freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness but it never says you will attain them or are guaranteed them.


The reform should have targeted the healthcare and insurance industries, putting regs on pricing, access to care, and made healthcare a non profit industry and left the people out of it. Personal decision and responsibility of whether you get insurance or not, none of the governments business.


Taxes and fines on people that are already struggling is insane.


The bill doesn't affect me personally in any way.


If you make under $28,000 you get a subsidy.

The mandate doesn't start until 2014.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Interesting article on the healthcare debate - http://www.investingdaily.com/id/17120/healthcare-reform-the-700-billion-lie.html

As far as the hole "you're not Christian if you don't like this bill" claim goes, that is just plain idiotic. Christ taught to help others. This is a personal choice. It is for our personal benefit to help others because we will be blessed and learn great things from it such as humility. This healthcare bill takes the choice right out of it and FORCES people to give money that is supposedly going to help others. Giving aid because you are forced to gives you nothing, just as Christ taught. If we are not helping people out of our own free will, it means absolutely nothing in the eyes of God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Interesting article on the healthcare debate -
http://www.investingdaily.com/id/17120/healthcare-reform-the-700-billion-lie.html




Good article. It puts my feelings on the subject to written word. It kinda stinks that there is a feeling out there that if I don't support this I'm a bad person. I feel this is a bad policy, its fixing a hole in a bucket by pouring more water into the bucket.

p.s. The blatant stomping on the constitution that seems to be more and more acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The people who were against it seem to forget that the uninsured were not just going home and dying they went to the emergency room and then defaulted on the bill. The hospitals then just jack up the price of service to cover those unpayed bills. These pople would wait until they were so sick they had to go the emergency room costing losts of money, if they could have gotten treatment earlier it would have been much cheaper than an emergency room visit.

Now maybe if they truly turned away people who could not pay and left in the parking lot to die, they might have something to complain about when these people all of sudden were allowed to get treatment intead of just dying for free.

Max

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Interesting article on the healthcare debate -
http://www.investingdaily.com/id/17120/healthcare-reform-the-700-billion-lie.html


As far as the hole "you're not Christian if you don't like this bill" claim goes, that is just plain idiotic. Christ taught to help others. This is a personal choice. It is for our personal benefit to help others because we will be blessed and learn great things from it such as humility. This healthcare bill takes the choice right out of it and FORCES people to give money that is supposedly going to help others. Giving aid because you are forced to gives you nothing, just as Christ taught. If we are not helping people out of our own free will, it means absolutely nothing in the eyes of God.




Well it seems like you Christians were doing such a piss poor job of helping the poor and sick that the governement had to step in. Maybe if the Churches could actually help all of those in need and would be willing to do so we would not need health care reform. We could go to the church instead on the emergency room.

Despite all of the good intentions of Christians there were still millions of sick people with no health care and not enough food to eat. How dare you Christians allow this to happen?

Max

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Rush Limbaugh said he would leave the country if the bill was signed.


He's still complaining his fat ass off, making a ton of money, and he hasn't left. What gives? :poke:



Maybe everytime that big fat idiot opens his hate filled mouth we should remind him of that promise. I bet him and Chavez would get along well, maybe they will take him.

Max

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Maybe everytime that big fat idiot opens his hate filled mouth we should remind him of that promise. I bet him and Chavez would get along well, maybe they will take him.


Max



Looks like you are the one with a "hate filled mouth" :poke:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Y'all started name-calling again (despite the Mod telling you not to, or he would shut the thread down).

 

Really, the OP's original question was answered by Phil. He explained why a rational, non-religious zealot, non poor-hating, smart, musician American could have reservations about Obama's/Congress' proposed HC legislation. Should be /thread right there.

 

But it goes on, so I will say that I am a musician, I don't hate poor people (I try to help them), I work for a company that provides me with healthcare, I don't want people to suffer, I am not rich, I am not a Christian or religious, I'm not a republican, and yet I do not support this legislation.

 

This bill does not seem to do much about the biggest issue in American healthcare -- the large cost of it. I am for HC reform; I am not a fan of the status quo (very few are), but I don't like this bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

This report illuminates facts about the cost of health care in the U.S. (Written Statement to Senate Special Committee on Aging, Mark Pearson, Head, Health Division, OECD 30th September 2009):

"...such is the level of health spending in the United States that public (i.e. government) spending on health per capita in the United States is greater than in all other OECD countries, excepting only Norway and Luxembourg. For this amount of public expenditure in the United States, government provides insurance coverage only for elderly and disabled people (through Medicare) and some of the poor (through Medicaid and the State Children

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share




×
×
  • Create New...