Catholic Bishops Call for Health Care Reform

I agree with the bishops. I think everyone agrees.

If people would only educate themselves, instead of listening to what the latest talk radio/tv entertainer is saying

"Americans who say they don’t support the health reform bills pending in Congress change their minds when informed of the major provisions of the bills, according to an analysis of public attitudes by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The 16-page report shows that despite a year of media saturation coverage of the health-reform debate, knowledge of what is actually in the bills pending in Congress is scant. It indicates that voters aren't actually looking at what is in the bills, but are being swayed by what they hear."

and, if other principals of the various religious groups would speak out for decent health care, perhaps we could drown out the "sensation seeking" extremists who are more interested in their own bank accounts, or points of view, or whatever...than they are in seeing that Americans of all descriptions have access to reasonably priced health care.
Health News Florida

http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/housesenatebill_final.pdf

It would also help if the Democrats and the White House had made the message a lot clearer and had a firmer voice in the media debate.

wow - I didn't know the Catholic Bishops were in such support of Universal Health care! I would guess the more conservative Catholics in our country do not agree. Just as the more conservative Catholics (many in my family) went with Bush on the war issue - not Pope John Paul (the issue of preservation of life did not prevail in this, and I do not think it will prevail in health care reform issues - in the minds of many religious conservatives).

but I'm so glad to hear of the support by Catholic Bishops.

Passing legislation to provide universal, affordable health has been a longtime goal of the Catholic bishops, and in their letter to Congress (pdf version here) they reiterate that they consider health care "a basic human right." They have even called health care reform a "pro-life issue,"

I would say that everyone does not agree with affordable health care for all as a basic human right. not by far. but hopefully we can continue with educating the public and gaining more support for the right to health care.

wow - I didn't know the Catholic Bishops were in such support of Universal Health care! I would guess the more conservative Catholics in our country do not agree. Just as the more conservative Catholics (many in my family) went with Bush on the war issue - not Pope John Paul (the issue of preservation of life did not prevail in this, and I do not think it will prevail in health care reform issues - in the minds of many religious conservatives).

but I'm so glad to hear of the support by Catholic Bishops.
I would say that everyone does not agree with affordable health care for all as a basic human right. not by far. but hopefully we can continue with educating the public and gaining more support for the right to health care.

The "right" to healthcare? How can something be a right if it requires enslaving someone else to provide it?

I think that access to affordable medical care should be a reality in our country - but I think getting the costs of health care down will do more for that then requiring everyone to have insurance.

The "right" to healthcare? How can something be a right if it requires enslaving someone else to provide it?

I believe health care is a basic human right especially in an advanced society. yes. and no, I do not believe in enslaving anyone for any reason. not part of the plan.

I believe health care is a basic human right especially in an advanced society. yes. and no, I do not believe in enslaving anyone for any reason. not part of the plan.

Ok, so you are refering to a "group right", not an individual right. Group rights commonly infringe individual rights, because they require enslavement in some form or another.

The general case difference being a free society vs. a social democracy. Social democrats believe individual rights can and should be infringed to enforce a moral sense of fairness.

I think that access to affordable medical care should be a reality in our country - but I think getting the costs of health care down will do more for that then requiring everyone to have insurance.

we can do both (reduce costs and provide health care for everyone). and we should. and of course revamping the health care/insurance system will need to focus on quality health care (not disease based medicine), efficient/timely/comprehensive delivery of care, and lowering/maintaining reasonable costs. the idea is quality and affordable - so why do people think they are going to suddenly not have access to surgery or whatever? listen, I don't think we're there yet - a worthwhile health plan to provide affordable health care for all is going to take a lot of work - possibly years - to find all the right solutions and make it fit our needs as a country. we must start somewhere but with the understanding that it is a huge work in progress.

Ok, so you are refering to a "group right", not an individual right. Group rights commonly infringe individual rights, because they require enslavement in some form or another.

The general case difference being a free society vs. a social democracy. Social democrats believe individual rights can and should be infringed to enforce a moral sense of fairness.

I am fairly certain that we do not have to give up freedoms in order to have health care. we do not have to change our form of government to care for people's health. I believe its a moral issue as well as a basic human right to have access to health care. especially in a country as great as ours.

I don't think we have to worry about rationing - that was just dumb. And you know I asked every foreigner I could find about their country's health care to see how realistic they thought that was! ;-)

But the more I study this issue the more I think that part of the waste/expense is coming from people who do not properly value their care because they do not see it as a direct expense or result of their decisions. Why should they care how expensive it is to go to an ER vs. a clinic when they are not picking up the tab for it?

I think that if we can get some basic reforms - cost of malpractice insurance, different rates for different people, fraud, amount of bureaucracy, cost of medicine etc. down it would go a LONG way towards making health care affordable & accessible.

contrary to what the Rush Limbaugh's have to say, I am fairly certain that we do not have to give up freedoms in order to have health care.

I don't listen to Rush, I think for myself, thank you very much. ;-)

You always sacrifice freedoms when you force something upon people through rule of law, especially if that 'something' is commercial.

Thought a loud guy in a restaurant recently had an interesting idea (if you don't want me to listen, use your inside voice) - he said that if they get this thing passed and then try to change it or scale it back, there will be a huge uproar ala trying to mess w/ Social Security.

As I was very much in a "anti-bureaucracy, anti-entitled" mood, I thought it was a definite possibility. Especially after hearing some propaganda commercial the other day about how our government had made a promise to veterans etc. about their health care and were now attempting to make changes/cutbacks.

I am getting very tired of many programs that I think are a good short term idea (welfare, food stamps, unemployment) becoming lifestyles. Think we need to do more to break those cycles and make the assistance temporary again.

Thought a loud guy in a restaurant recently had an interesting idea (if you don't want me to listen, use your inside voice) - he said that if they get this thing passed and then try to change it or scale it back, there will be a huge uproar ala trying to mess w/ Social Security.

As I was very much in a "anti-bureaucracy, anti-entitled" mood, I thought it was a definite possibility. Especially after hearing some propaganda commercial the other day about how our government had made a promise to veterans etc. about their health care and were now attempting to make changes/cutbacks.

I am getting very tired of many programs that I think are a good short term idea (welfare, food stamps, unemployment) becoming lifestyles. Think we need to do more to break those cycles and make the assistance temporary again.

Welfare refrom from 96 was highly successful. Welfare rolls were reduced by 60%, the system was changed from open ended to finite, and employment in the country rose as a direct result.

In 2009, a number of the original reforms Clinton championed were undone by the democrats in Congress through the 2009 stimulus bill.

Stimulus Bill Abolishes Welfare Reform and Adds New Welfare Spending

Ok, so you are refering to a "group right", not an individual right. Group rights commonly infringe individual rights, because they require enslavement in some form or another.

I don't know what you mean by "enslavement" but anyone who thinks they can enjoy the fruits of modern conveniences without contributing to the enslavement of someone else is delusional. Did you buy any gasoline today? Any fresh produce? Anything made in whole or in part with material that originated in a communist country? Or a country that has real enslavement, the likes of which people living in the United States are by and large clueless about? Maybe a pharmaceutical, for example? Shoes, clothes?

Citizens of European countries with universal health care overwhelmingly feel free in their day to day lives, and one reason is the security of knowing they are not just one slip and fall away from bankruptcy. There is no absolute freedom unless you withdraw completely from society, grow your own food, live off the grid and do without modern medicine. It's all a trade off in one way or another.

I don't know what you mean by "enslavement" but anyone who thinks they can enjoy the fruits of modern conveniences without contributing to the enslavement of someone else is delusional. Did you buy any gasoline today? Any fresh produce? Anything made in whole or in part with material that originated in a communist country? Or a country that has real enslavement, the likes of which people living in the United States are by and large clueless about? Maybe a pharmaceutical, for example? Shoes, clothes?

Citizens of European countries with universal health care overwhelmingly feel free in their day to day lives, and one reason is the security of knowing they are not just one slip and fall away from bankruptcy. There is no absolute freedom unless you withdraw completely from society, grow your own food, live off the grid and do without modern medicine. It's all a trade off in one way or another.

The discussion was about an individual right to access something produced by another. Does government mandate that I have access to gasoline, fresh produce, and products from communist countries - not currently. (Give the democrats time though, I'm sure they're working on it. ) This type of "group right" infringes on individual rights, an act social democrats take no issue with. That was the point I was trying to make.

I don't know what you mean by "enslavement" but anyone who thinks they can enjoy the fruits of modern conveniences without contributing to the enslavement of someone else is delusional. Did you buy any gasoline today? Any fresh produce? Anything made in whole or in part with material that originated in a communist country? Or a country that has real enslavement, the likes of which people living in the United States are by and large clueless about? Maybe a pharmaceutical, for example? Shoes, clothes?

Citizens of European countries with universal health care overwhelmingly feel free in their day to day lives, and one reason is the security of knowing they are not just one slip and fall away from bankruptcy. There is no absolute freedom unless you withdraw completely from society, grow your own food, live off the grid and do without modern medicine. It's all a trade off in one way or another.

I think he's talking about when the government (the United Staes government) strips us of our individual rights for the alleged "greater good" whatever that might mean. I wouldn't necessarily feel free simply because the government provided me with financial security.

I don't listen to Rush, I think for myself, thank you very much. ;-)

You always sacrifice freedoms when you force something upon people through rule of law, especially if that 'something' is commercial.

the freedom to behave as third world citizens, with every person for themselves. the freedom of unrestricted greed. the freedom to step over someone on the way to the coliseum. republitarians have no problem with folks serving the better good as long as it involves killing others in the name of god and country. health care? you're on your own!

I think he's talking about when the government (the United Staes government) strips us of our individual rights for the alleged "greater good" whatever that might mean. I wouldn't necessarily feel free simply because the government provided me with financial security.

Yep.

The discussion was about an individual right to access something produced by another. Does government mandate that I have access to gasoline, fresh produce, and products from communist countries - not currently. (Give the democrats time though, I'm sure they're working on it. ) This type of "group right" infringes on individual rights, an act social democrats take no issue with. That was the point I was trying to make.

still, NotDead's point is totally on the mark regarding the trade offs or in some cases, sacrifices, or impact on ourselves or others - in order to advance our civilization, take care of the poorest, provide opportunity for education and work, and keep our country great. we don't stay great by staying the same. it takes courage to keep doing the right thing. No one here is saying give people something for nothing. Only that the greatest nation on earth should be able to provide affordable health care to its citizens. we all have to work hard to make that happen. it isn't something for nothing.

still, NotDead's point is totally on the mark regarding the trade offs or in some cases, sacrifices, or impact on ourselves or others - in order to advance our civilization, take care of the poorest, provide opportunity for education and work, and keep our country great. we don't stay great by staying the same. it takes courage to keep doing the right thing. No one here is saying give people something for nothing. Only that the greatest nation on earth should be able to provide affordable health care to its citizens. we all have to work hard to make that happen. it isn't something for nothing.

The greatest nation on earth is 'greatest' for a lot of reasons, one of which is that we do things differently than our european counterparts. The more we try to bend America toward euro values, the more we risk becoming less great, more mediocre. That risk is especially apparent when the policies being promoted endanger one of the cornerstones this country was built upon - individual rights.

The greatest nation on earth is 'greatest' for a lot of reasons, one of which is that we do things differently than our european counterparts. The more we try to bend America toward euro values, the more we risk becoming less great, more mediocre. That risk is especially apparent when the policies being promoted endanger one of the cornerstones this country was built upon - individual rights.

The problem is that insurance companies are currently just bending us over.

I finally understand the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservative have and don't want that to change, even if it means their neighbor would benefit. Liberals have and want their neighbors to benefit as well. I wonder what Jesus would say?

Let me just start with a simple - :roll:

The problem is that insurance companies are currently just bending us over.

I finally understand the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservative have and don't want that to change, even if it means their neighbor would benefit.

Generally, and I don't speak for all conservatives, but I think the gist of how they feel is that everyone should be afforded the same opportunities to earn whatever they can achieve and not be penalized for those achievments.

Liberals have and want their neighbors to benefit as well. I wonder what Jesus would say?

If liberals want to give away what they have, they have the right to do so. My point was about the slippery slope liberals stand on when they take from one individual to give to another. You infringe individual rights in the process. You can't claim someone has an "right" to something that isn't theirs to begin with. Healthcare is not a right, it's a privilege, and if you provide that privilege to everyone, you are going to have to restrict individual rights in order to provide it.

Let me just start with a simple - :roll:



Generally, and I don't speak for all conservatives, but I think the gist of how they feel is that everyone should be afforded the same opportunities to earn whatever they can achieve and not be penalized for those achievments.



If liberals want to give away what they have, they have the right to do so. This post was about the slippery sloap liberals stand on when they take from one individual to give to another. You infringe individual rights in the process.

You see it's interesting how you refer to individual rights when speaking of conservatives. The vast majority of conservatives are also self described "Christians". This is where the slope and line get extremely blurred.

As for earning whatever one can achieve and not be penalized, most conservative's start off with a nice hefty chunk, even better now since the Republican's did away with the Estate Tax. The slow roll back of laws, morals, and modern day customs that the conservatives espouse as personal freedoms and liberties is nothing more than an attempt to establish a new monarchy. I'm fairly certain the founding fathers would be quite disappointed.

You see it's interesting how you refer to individual rights when speaking of conservatives. The vast majority of conservatives are also self described "Christians". This is where the slope and line get extremely blurred.

As for earning whatever one can achieve and not be penalized, most conservative's start off with a nice hefty chunk, even better now since the Republican's did away with the Estate Tax. The slow roll back of laws, morals, and modern day customs that the conservatives espouse as personal freedoms and liberties is nothing more than an attempt to establish a new monarchy. I'm fairly certain the founding fathers would be quite disappointed.

You'll have to take that up with the conservatives you're addressing directly. I'm a skeptical christian conservative leaning libertarian, and I've earned everything I have through my own hard work and suffering. I'd also never try and force religious or social beliefs on anyone, but you already knew that didn't you?

(This thread is now officially off the rails.)

The problem is that insurance companies are currently just bending us over.

Biggest issue I have with being "required" to have insurance. Gov't mandated ankle grabber.