Forced health insurance

AtomicMouse1950

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 30, 2011
Posts
2,968
Media
22
Likes
460
Points
218
Age
73
Location
Placerville , Ca.
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
The Right Wing's view is, only they (the Rich) should be allowed to pay for medical coverage for themselves. Everyone else should just die. And Congress doesn't want to do anything for adequate health care for the masses, but they want us to still pay for their medical insurance. Even federal employees have to pay out of their own pocket for insurance. But Congress... the ones who can afford it most, don't pay one cent of their health care coverage. So the system is skewed from the top down. Yeah it's the trickle down theory.. It didn't work when Reagan introduced it, and it still doesn't work now. Although that's what the Right Wing expects you to believe. Just as they insist keeping taxes for the Rich down to the lowest point, Since Reagan, will create jobs. What Jobs have they created??? Zero... Ziltch... Nadda. It's all a sham by the RW.
 

redneckgymrat

Experimental Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Posts
1,479
Media
0
Likes
17
Points
73
Location
Texas
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
The Right Wing's view is, only they (the Rich) should be allowed to pay for medical coverage for themselves. Everyone else should just die.

Well, that's certainly an extreme statement.

"People should provide for themselves," vs "everyone else should just die." Do you actually believe this, or did you just take it to the most absurd extreme, possible, for the effect?
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
2 things. Republicans and greed.

The two are indistinguishable from each other are they not?


The Right Wing's view is, only they (the Rich) should be allowed to pay for medical coverage for themselves. Everyone else should just die.

Bingo. They don't have the never to fucking just SAY it. But they know their voters can't really connect-the-dots so they don't have a thing to worry about. 'Repeal and replace' they say. But what is the replacement? Yep DIE you poor idiot.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mensch1351

Cherished Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,166
Media
0
Likes
341
Points
303
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
You must not understand the context of the line "Am I my brother's keeper?" It's a rhetorical expression that implies, "Of course not." It isn't a great line to use when trying to establish that everyone should be responsible for one another.

Do you know where this phrase actually comes from? In the book of Genesis Cain is furious that his brother Abel's sacrifice was acceptable to God and his was not (Cain brought all the shitty fruits of his labors -- Abel offered God the best!) It is God himself who asks this question of Cain........."where is your brother Abel?" And Cain responds: "How should I know, am I my brother's keeper!" The rhetorical answer is certainly not "of course not" it is -- you bet your ass you ARE your brother's keeper -- he IS your brother!" God then declares: Abel's blood calls out to me from the ground! And for what he's done Cain is marked for life and banished to roam the earth.

And btway -- I would think that in any "society" that calls itself Civilized the very notion that we ARE indeed responsible for one another is what separates us from the animal kingdom! (and even in many instances in that kingdom, they look after their own!)
 

AtomicMouse1950

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 30, 2011
Posts
2,968
Media
22
Likes
460
Points
218
Age
73
Location
Placerville , Ca.
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Well, that's certainly an extreme statement.

"People should provide for themselves," vs "everyone else should just die." Do you actually believe this, or did you just take it to the most absurd extreme, possible, for the effect?

It might be extreme, but it also happens to be true. Name three things the Right Wing was against, where tbey even offered an alternative to. We know what they are against, but what are they for?
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Do you know where this phrase actually comes from? In the book of Genesis Cain is furious that his brother Abel's sacrifice was acceptable to God and his was not (Cain brought all the shitty fruits of his labors -- Abel offered God the best!) It is God himself who asks this question of Cain........."where is your brother Abel?" And Cain responds: "How should I know, am I my brother's keeper!" The rhetorical answer is certainly not "of course not" it is -- you bet your ass you ARE your brother's keeper -- he IS your brother!"
I know all about it. I'm a catechist. I maintain that the implied answer to this rhetorical question is "no," because that was the intention of the person who said it. Now that you bring it up with a twist, I'll further posit that God does not bother answering at all.
 

slurper_la

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Posts
5,862
Media
9
Likes
3,692
Points
333
Location
Los Angeles (California, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Do you know where this phrase actually comes from? In the book of Genesis Cain is furious that his brother Abel's sacrifice was acceptable to God and his was not (Cain brought all the shitty fruits of his labors -- Abel offered God the best!) It is God himself who asks this question of Cain........."where is your brother Abel?" And Cain responds: "How should I know, am I my brother's keeper!" The rhetorical answer is certainly not "of course not" it is -- you bet your ass you ARE your brother's keeper -- he IS your brother!" God then declares: Abel's blood calls out to me from the ground! And for what he's done Cain is marked for life and banished to roam the earth.

And btway -- I would think that in any "society" that calls itself Civilized the very notion that we ARE indeed responsible for one another is what separates us from the animal kingdom! (and even in many instances in that kingdom, they look after their own!)

^ this

I'm not surprised by the lack of understanding

the religious, conservative Christians always prove to be the least Christ-like in our society but always turn to bible phrases, oft misquoted, to justify their seething hatred, racism, homophobia, classism, etc
 

monel

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
1,638
Media
0
Likes
48
Points
183
Gender
Male
This whole debate comes down to a very simple question. In the 21st Century is the USA, as the primary world super power, prepared to allow its citizens to die if they do not have the means to pay for health care? If so, then there is no need for a health care overhaul ; if not then we need a method to make people pay for the coverage they receive.
 

AtomicMouse1950

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 30, 2011
Posts
2,968
Media
22
Likes
460
Points
218
Age
73
Location
Placerville , Ca.
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
We of all people, should NOT be having this debate about who can or can't afford to live, or die because of lack of funds for health care. This whole argument is ridiculous. Everyone should be allowed to get access to proper health care. IF our very own Congress, gets their health care benefits paid for by tax payer dollars, but they disallow their constituents to have the same rights to health care, then it's a simple matter of taking those benefits away from Congress once and for all. They can most afford health care coverage on their own. They don't need tax payer dollars to pay for their health care. They they don't want us to have it, then they should not have it. END of STORY. The only other solution, is to give their constituents the same coverage that they have enjoyed for years, and years and years, even after they're out of office. This is an Economic War of the Haves and the Have Nots. If they continue to make it about that, then it's war with the very people who have taken an oath to the Constitution to, Preserve, Protect and Defend. They're supposed to do our bidding, NOT take the Grover Norquist Oath of no New Taxes and ignoring the primary oath to the Constitution, which is required by law. This after all IS a NO Brainer. Health Care for ALL.
 

OCMuscleJock

Superior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Posts
3,187
Media
88
Likes
3,079
Points
198
Location
San Luis Obispo, CA
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Agree!!!
we of all people, should not be having this debate about who can or can't afford to live, or die because of lack of funds for health care. This whole argument is ridiculous. Everyone should be allowed to get access to proper health care. If our very own congress, gets their health care benefits paid for by tax payer dollars, but they disallow their constituents to have the same rights to health care, then it's a simple matter of taking those benefits away from congress once and for all. They can most afford health care coverage on their own. They don't need tax payer dollars to pay for their health care. They they don't want us to have it, then they should not have it. End of story. The only other solution, is to give their constituents the same coverage that they have enjoyed for years, and years and years, even after they're out of office. This is an economic war of the haves and the have nots. If they continue to make it about that, then it's war with the very people who have taken an oath to the constitution to, preserve, protect and defend. They're supposed to do our bidding, not take the grover norquist oath of no new taxes and ignoring the primary oath to the constitution, which is required by law. This after all is a no brainer. Health care for all.
 

AtomicMouse1950

Cherished Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
May 30, 2011
Posts
2,968
Media
22
Likes
460
Points
218
Age
73
Location
Placerville , Ca.
Verification
View
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
We of all people, should NOT be having this debate about who can or can't afford to live, or die because of lack of funds for health care. This whole argument is ridiculous. Everyone should be allowed to get access to proper health care. IF our very own Congress, gets their health care benefits paid for by tax payer dollars, but they disallow their constituents to have the same rights to health care, then it's a simple matter of taking those benefits away from Congress once and for all. They can most afford health care coverage on their own. They don't need tax payer dollars to pay for their health care. They don't want us to have it, then they should not have it. END of STORY. The only other solution, is to give their constituents the same coverage that they have enjoyed for years, and years and years, even after they're out of office. This is an Economic War of the Haves and the Have Nots. If they continue to make it about that, then it's war with the very people who have taken an oath to the Constitution to, Preserve, Protect and Defend. They're supposed to do our bidding, NOT take the Grover Norquist Oath of no New Taxes and ignoring the primary oath to the Constitution, which is required by law. This after all IS a NO Brainer. Health Care for ALL.
Bump:biggrin1: