Nationalized Healthcare? Not In My Back Yard!

I don't think Jesus supported having the people paying the medical bills for the prostitute's STDs.

No, but he supported saving the poor and oppressed and pretty much giving one's entire wealth to them in order to enter heaven.
 
The billygoats ate most of my :rolleyes: and :lol: , so my drivel is sometimes less emoticonned than yours. Sorry about that.

I wonder if 18,000 per year register with :jesus: more than they do with his followers?

Couple of points. Jesus could have healed every poor/sick person in Israel - but he didnt. Why? Was it because him healing people was a testament to the power of God, not necessarily a statement that there shouldnt be any poor/sick people? When he told the man at the well to pick up his mat and walk away did he give him a guarentee of continued health? Not at all. In fact, he warned him he needed to live a life free from sin or he could end up right back on the mat begging.

Jesus wouldnt be that concerned with the fact that people had actually died. Thats everyones fate in life. But he would be concered with is the state of their immortal soul.....which has nothing to do with the fact if you can afford health care or not.

Again, an athiest over-reaches for biblical analogy and misses the mark by a mile.
 
I think I have been rather involved in this thread, and I am living in the US. I have experienced the two systems first-hand. I know how much I paid in taxes for the nationalized one and how much I'm paying for the private one, and I know what I'm getting for my money. I've experienced in both countries dentists, doctors, ophtalmologists, hospitals, dermatologists...

Nationalized healthcare, when properly implemented, works. It's as simple as that. I for one do not see anything immoral or ridiculous in paying taxes so that me and my fellow citizens can get good and proper care, and given that it's less expensive to a country than private healthcare I have even less qualms about it.

Well Masq, is the French system 'in trouble' or not? I have heard several opinions on this.
 
No, but he supported saving the poor and oppressed and pretty much giving one's entire wealth to them in order to enter heaven.

Giving up your entire wealth to the poor isnt a requirement to enter heaven. Being wealthy can make it harder to enter heaven, but thats largely because such wealth is a distraction from whats really important. But nice try regardless.
 
I think I have been rather involved in this thread, and I am living in the US. I have experienced the two systems first-hand. I know how much I paid in taxes for the nationalized one and how much I'm paying for the private one, and I know what I'm getting for my money. I've experienced in both countries dentists, doctors, ophtalmologists, hospitals, dermatologists...

Nationalized healthcare, when properly implemented, works. It's as simple as that. I for one do not see anything immoral or ridiculous in paying taxes so that me and my fellow citizens can get good and proper care, and given that it's less expensive to a country than private healthcare I have even less qualms about it.

the big problem with are healthcare is insurance companies, not just the patients insurances but the dotors mal practice insurance drives prices up to high, I personaly think that if the government would stop eating out of the palm of some of these lobbyist that the cost of healthcare would go down, doctors pay alot in thier mal practice insurance and i think i heard on this post that the cost of medical treatment is 30% insurance cost.

i have experienced free health care, i have been to free clinics before, obviosly lower quality then my doctor i have today. In gerneral many of notions you gave do sound tempting, if the government could provide free health care for everybody, while also keeping it compative and also alowing the comsumer to choose what is best for him, i would be for this plan, but i am doubtful that the American government can, nor will be able to provide such a plan anytime in the next 20 years. I live by the hope for the best, but plan for the worst philosphy.
 
Couple of points. Jesus could have healed every poor/sick person in Israel - but he didnt. Why?
Because perhaps he couldn't and the stories about him healing anybody are perhaps just that.
Again, an athiest over-reaches for biblical analogy and misses the mark by a mile.
So you are saying that 18,000 people dying from lack of medical care shouldn't register to Jesus' followers? Sorry for being so far off the mark.
 
In no way can I see a religious argument be valid against the issue at hand. Most relgious organizations fully embrace providing universal health care. If there's a simple and an efficient method to do so then why wouldn't they support it? There are some so-called reglious people that are leaning so far right that that can no longer think sensibly about these matters. Be careful that you don't fall into that category.
 
Ah, yes. Michael Moore is obviously a icon of truth and justice. :mischief:

Not to mention he has very little to do with the movie until the last 10 minutes, he doesn't even give comment much, just presents facts. He also doesn't care if you download his movies, so feel free! He just presents facts and true testomonies of people who have been victimized by the healthcare industry.
 
Because perhaps he couldn't and the stories about him healing anybody are perhaps just that.

Then why are you so quick to refer to Jesus? On one hand you deride christians for not being good enough christians and on the other deny anything Christ did. Does your hypocrisy know no bounds? Or are you just showing off how powerful a troll you truly are?

So you are saying that 18,000 people dying from lack of medical care shouldn't register to Jesus' followers? Sorry for being so far off the mark.

As I stated before, they would more likely be concerned with the state of their heart and belief than how they died. Christians understand people die in a variety of ways each and every day. That isnt going to change. What does concern them is if people die without knowing Christ.
 
Not to mention he has very little to do with the movie until the last 10 minutes, he doesn't even give comment much, just presents facts. He also doesn't care if you download his movies, so feel free! He just presents facts and true testomonies of people who have been victimized by the healthcare industry.

I have bolded the weak link in your assumption.
 
Giving up your entire wealth to the poor isnt a requirement to enter heaven. Being wealthy can make it harder to enter heaven, but thats largely because such wealth is a distraction from whats really important. But nice try regardless.

I didn't really mean "requirement" (I know that, obviously) but Matthew 19:24 is pretty specific; regardless, it's clear that glorification of money, which hardcore capitalism often does, is not a very christian attitude.
 
Then why are you so quick to refer to Jesus? On one hand you deride christians for not being good enough christians and on the other deny anything Christ did. Does your hypocrisy know no bounds? Or are you just showing off how powerful a troll you truly are?
I follow some of the teachings attributed to Jesus. I just don't happen to believe some of the miracle working and other claims.
As I stated before, they would more likely be concerned with the state of their heart and belief than how they died. Christians understand people die in a variety of ways each and every day. That isnt going to change. What does concern them is if people die without knowing Christ.
If you don't give them proper medical care, they tend to die sooner and have less of a time frame to know him.
 
How do you know they are not facts? Have you even seen the film?

i for one have not yet seen sicko but i know Micael moore, like most people will only show one side of the picture, take everything with a grain of salt
 
How do you know they are not facts? Have you even seen the film?

No, I havent seen the film. I would rather have feces laced bamboo stuck under my fingernails. However, I am familiar with Michael Moores typical offer of what a 'fact' is and thus am more than hesitant to accept anything the man offers up as a 'fact'.
 
No, I havent seen the film. I would rather have feces laced bamboo stuck under my fingernails. However, I am familiar with Michael Moores typical offer of what a 'fact' is and thus am more than hesitant to accept anything the man offers up as a 'fact'.

Or, maybe you dont want to the face the harsh realization the man is right? :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom