BigBen,
i accidentally hit the "post quick reply" button instead of the "go advanced" button. my interest was in the thread was already waining, just didn't have the motivation to go edit the darn thing. you were right to call me out, my apologies.
i think your heart is in the right place here (everyone should be given a fair shot at advancement in life), but you're going about it in all the wrong ways. what you're advocating are essentially marxist ideas that any student of human nature and/or history will tell you are misguided at best.
think of all the thread topics on this board... how many contain glowing praise for a major government program? and yet, some people think giving the same entity responsibility for our bodily health and well-being is a great idea.
the moral argument for national healthcare is even weaker. healthcare isn't a right. you have no "right" to go to the doctor. if a person's kid is sick... they have absolutely no right to take money from another person to pay the bills.
nationalized healthcare is essentially forcing one person to pay for another's responsibilities under threat of imprisonment.
can anyone make a serious case for justifying this? i'm not saying people shouldn't help one another out... but is it a proper function of goverment to force people to do it?
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
~ Winston Churchill
|