Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlatan
Of course there is an alternative... the alternative that those who are against universal healthcare suggest: Let everyone fend for themselves.
Someone can't pay for their treatment? Let them die.
Can't afford to look after yourself if you have diabetes? It's a good way to thin the heard.
This is essentially what is being said by many here on this thread.
|
Charlton, what about the smokers with lung cancer? If they can not pay for their treatment they should die.
How about alcohol drinkers? If they get cirrhosis of the liver they should die if they cant pay.
What about the people who love the extreme sports? Should I or the others have to fund their healthcare because they love the adrenaline rush and break their neck?
These are a few of the instances where people control their life and health, I am sure there are hundreds more, and if they dont take personal responsibility for their well being why should I have to fund it?
Why is it that the have nots want to take what they do not have from the ones that have?
Why does the Democratic party the champion of the have nots, the ones who barely pay any taxes keep digging their hands into my pocket?
Votes