Page 9 of 13 [ 205 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

23 Sep 2011, 12:45 pm

ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn


Nonsense. It's a soldier's duty to fight. It's a teacher's duty to teach. It's a cashier's duty to help customers. It's a coach's duty to coach. And so on. Public or private, big job or small - freedom doesn't come into play when you're on someone else's clock.

Besides, you're really reaching here. Most doctors already consider their service to be a duty, including those self-employed.



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

23 Sep 2011, 12:47 pm

marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


Like this?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ik4f1dRbP8[/youtube]



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Sep 2011, 1:32 pm

number5 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn


Nonsense. It's a soldier's duty to fight. It's a teacher's duty to teach. It's a cashier's duty to help customers. It's a coach's duty to coach. And so on. Public or private, big job or small - freedom doesn't come into play when you're on someone else's clock.

Besides, you're really reaching here. Most doctors already consider their service to be a duty, including those self-employed.


It is the doctor's -choice- to consider his services a DUTY. As for soldiers, they enlist voluntarily and teachers are not drafted either. There is a legal duty to adhere to the terms of a -contract- once that contract is entered into freely and there are is always a way of exiting the contract when its terms are no longer sustainable.

As a basic rule, no human is compelled by force or law to help another human except for a child dependent. Humans are only required not to impose force on others or to commit fraud. These are not duties, these are constraints. A DUTY is positive and can only be assumed voluntarily in the first place. If you see someone drowning you are under no moral or legal compulsion to jump in and try to save him. You are not even under a legal compulsion to summon help. Most people will be inclined to help others in an emergency, but this is a sentiment, not a moral or legal obligation.

ruveyn



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Sep 2011, 1:39 pm

This is why a mixed healthcare system is ideal. We have it good here in Canada. Some doctors choose to make it their duty to help people. Others who are more profit driven have the option of working for private health providers. Everybody wins!


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Sep 2011, 1:41 pm

Vigilans wrote:
This is why a mixed healthcare system is ideal. We have it good here in Canada. Some doctors choose to make it their duty to help people. Others who are more profit driven have the option of working for private health providers. Everybody wins!


Should everyone be obliged to pay into a system they do not want for themselves?

ruveyn



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

23 Sep 2011, 1:43 pm

ruveyn wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
This is why a mixed healthcare system is ideal. We have it good here in Canada. Some doctors choose to make it their duty to help people. Others who are more profit driven have the option of working for private health providers. Everybody wins!


Should everyone be obliged to pay into a system they do not want for themselves?

ruveyn


The same could be said for many other things, including the military. The quality of life and general content of the population in this country, knowing that there is no floor about to drop out beneath them, makes it well worth the cost. Those complaining here are a very stark minority


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

23 Sep 2011, 1:45 pm

ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn


Arguing with you is tiresome and pointless. I will never accept such black-and-white nonsense and you know it. My personal values on societal duty clash with yours and that's just that. We can argue until the world comes to an end and you will never change your mind and neither will I. In the end it all comes down to what society decides based on the democratic process. I'm through with this.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Sep 2011, 1:48 pm

marshall wrote:

Arguing with you is tiresome and pointless. I will never accept such black-and-white nonsense and you know it. My personal values on societal duty clash with yours and that's just that. We can argue until the world comes to an end and you will never change your mind and neither will I. In the end it all comes down to what society decides based on the democratic process. I'm through with this.


You favor slavery and I don't. So be it.

ruveyn



number5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2009
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,691
Location: sunny philadelphia

23 Sep 2011, 2:00 pm

ruveyn wrote:
number5 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn


Nonsense. It's a soldier's duty to fight. It's a teacher's duty to teach. It's a cashier's duty to help customers. It's a coach's duty to coach. And so on. Public or private, big job or small - freedom doesn't come into play when you're on someone else's clock.

Besides, you're really reaching here. Most doctors already consider their service to be a duty, including those self-employed.


It is the doctor's -choice- to consider his services a DUTY. As for soldiers, they enlist voluntarily and teachers are not drafted either. There is a legal duty to adhere to the terms of a -contract- once that contract is entered into freely and there are is always a way of exiting the contract when its terms are no longer sustainable.

As a basic rule, no human is compelled by force or law to help another human except for a child dependent. Humans are only required not to impose force on others or to commit fraud. These are not duties, these are constraints. A DUTY is positive and can only be assumed voluntarily in the first place. If you see someone drowning you are under no moral or legal compulsion to jump in and try to save him. You are not even under a legal compulsion to summon help. Most people will be inclined to help others in an emergency, but this is a sentiment, not a moral or legal obligation.

ruveyn


How would making healthcare a right take away a doctor's freedom? They still have a choice to enter into the profession - same as any other profession. No one's talking about drafting doctors here.

I also believe there are good samaritan laws, but I'm not familiar enough with them to go into detail. I'll look it up later when I have more time.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

23 Sep 2011, 2:21 pm

ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:

Arguing with you is tiresome and pointless. I will never accept such black-and-white nonsense and you know it. My personal values on societal duty clash with yours and that's just that. We can argue until the world comes to an end and you will never change your mind and neither will I. In the end it all comes down to what society decides based on the democratic process. I'm through with this.


You favor slavery and I don't. So be it.

ruveyn


Your definition of "slavery", not mine. Taxation is not slavery or theft. Once again, I'm through with you.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Sep 2011, 3:41 pm

To throw this back in people's faces, since most of you didn't watch the debate.

If Obamacare had been in effect in 2006, one of the Republican Candidates would be dead from Cancer.



LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

23 Sep 2011, 3:46 pm

ruveyn wrote:
marshall wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm basically saying the entire situation smells fishy, because if someone was severely disabled from cerebral palsy, people wouldn't be reacting that way towards the individual unless it was a setup. The overwhelming majority of Tea Partiers, would publicly admonish the individuals shouting at this individual. Furthermore, people tend to be more sympathetic towards people in a wheelchair, because it is a disability that they can see.

No. I can picture a bunch of selfish people reacting that way towards someone shaming them. "Healthcare isn't a right" is their motto.


If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn

Ruveyn, that is just BS. Duty is what is expected of this social primate; you're suggesting that anyone who isn't a sociopath is a slave. I know a lot of doctors, and I don't know a single one who would refrain from helping a needy person in front of them if they had the means to do so, whether that person could pay or not. I don't doubt that there are some who get into the field solely to make money, but most get into it because they want to practice health care. The beamer is a nice benny, but when you work 60+ hours a week and/or 24 hour shifts in the ED, you're going to end up with some nice bennys.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

23 Sep 2011, 3:57 pm

ruveyn wrote:
If healthcare is a right then it is the doctor's DUTY to treat. DUTY is that which is imposed on slaves. Free person perform services they chose to perform and are usually paid for their services.

Your premise is that human A has a DUTY to help human B, just because human B -needs- the help. You have left choice out.

ruveyn


Utter and complete nonsense. Such a conception of a framework for delivering upon a right to healtcare presumes that physicians are employees of the state, and not compensated for their services.

Consider another right: the right to receive a primary and secondary education, free at the point of delivery. Because of this right, it is a public school teacher's duty to teach. Are teachers therefore slaves? Of course not.

And more to the point, a physician in a system of universal, publicly funded, medically necessary health care can still be a private contractor. Almost every physician in Canada is a private business--yet somehow we manage to enshrine a statutory right to medically necessary care without making slaves of physicians and nurses.

Hyperole makes for good rhetoric--but it's no way to have a meaningful debate.


_________________
--James


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 Sep 2011, 3:58 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
To throw this back in people's faces, since most of you didn't watch the debate.

If Obamacare had been in effect in 2006, one of the Republican Candidates would be dead from Cancer.


As a matter of fact, here in Washington state, the number of uninsured young adults has already decreased - and Obama's healthcare reform is credited with that. Precisely, it's because young adults are allowed to remain on their parent's insurance. No one can tell me that that's a bad thing.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

23 Sep 2011, 4:00 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
To throw this back in people's faces, since most of you didn't watch the debate.

If Obamacare had been in effect in 2006, one of the Republican Candidates would be dead from Cancer.


As a matter of fact, here in Washington state, the number of uninsured young adults has already decreased - and Obama's healthcare reform is credited with that. Precisely, it's because young adults are allowed to remain on their parent's insurance. No one can tell me that that's a bad thing.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I know someone who can say Obamacare is a bad thing, and he can back it up, that man is Herman Cain, whom would be dead now if Obamacare was in place in 2006.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

23 Sep 2011, 4:05 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
To throw this back in people's faces, since most of you didn't watch the debate.

If Obamacare had been in effect in 2006, one of the Republican Candidates would be dead from Cancer.


As a matter of fact, here in Washington state, the number of uninsured young adults has already decreased - and Obama's healthcare reform is credited with that. Precisely, it's because young adults are allowed to remain on their parent's insurance. No one can tell me that that's a bad thing.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


I know someone who can say Obamacare is a bad thing, and he can back it up, that man is Herman Cain, whom would be dead now if Obamacare was in place in 2006.


But being that he's not dead, we'll never know for sure, now will we? :P

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer