Can you be a truly good Christian, yet be against universal healthcare?

ravi, the gov shouldn't be regulating personal moral code. murder is a criminal offense whereas health care is not...


But, I digress... Lemme recruit you into Shogun's Great Health Care Compromise.

Now, Ravi... brainstorm for me the top ten most important checkups and health screen tests that you can think of.. If you'd rather, feel free to create different lists for children (0-18), adult males (18-45) and adult females, senior males (45-death) and senior females


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
 
Reread your own posts shit-for-brains. You gave three choices for people with respect to taxation in defense of your position that taxation, "technically" follows the golden rule. Some really stupid shit about how nobody is forced to do anything...except of course choose between the three options you laid out. Boy you're a thick headed retard sometimes.

Are you always this pissy when you can't prove yourself right?
 
And if you force people to do things they don't want to....how is that not violating the GR? Do you like being forced to do things you don't want to do? Does anyone?

No, of course not. This is probably a big reason we don't make laws according to the golden rule.
 
ravi, the gov shouldn't be regulating personal moral code. murder is a criminal offense whereas health care is not...


But, I digress... Lemme recruit you into Shogun's Great Health Care Compromise.

Now, Ravi... brainstorm for me the top ten most important checkups and health screen tests that you can think of.. If you'd rather, feel free to create different lists for children (0-18), adult males (18-45) and adult females, senior males (45-death) and senior females


1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Shog, need I say it again? I don't know what the answer on health care is...and I agree, the government shouldn't be enforcing personal moral code.
 
mmkay. The golden rule is treat others as you want to be treated. So if I want to tax you if you make above a certain amount and I'll happily be taxed if I make above the same amount, how am I not keeping to the golden rule?

No you didn't state it had anything to do with the golden rule?:cuckoo:
 
Not quite. You just got pwned by me because you're incapable of reading for comprehension. I didn't say that taxation was based on the golden rule, I said it didn't violate the golden rule.

Funny, now you and jreeves are convinced taxation is based on the golden rule.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You did However say that forcing people to pay taxes to help pay for others health care was following the Golden rule.
 
But you still haven't answered...how is forcing others to do something NOT violating the golden rule? THe term "force" = making them do something they don't want to do, which is by definition doing unto others what you wouldn't want done unto you....
 
But you still haven't answered...how is forcing others to do something NOT violating the golden rule? THe term "force" = making them do something they don't want to do, which is by definition doing unto others what you wouldn't want done unto you....

Because in reality the golden rule has nothing to do with other people. LOL! I know it sounds stupid, but it's true.
 
Shog, need I say it again? I don't know what the answer on health care is...and I agree, the government shouldn't be enforcing personal moral code.

Im not asking you for a solution; im incorporating you into the Shogun's Great Health Care Compromise.


Now, you are a woman in the adult female catagory. I'm sure you are familiar with preventative screenings and such. What, in your opinion, are the top ten issues females should consider in order to preempt a medical condition? Once we develop a basic list of preventative screenings we can gauge a COST and offer these to all Americans. Now, of course this won't be as good as private insurance but it's a place to start. Membership would be free to current US citizens and would be funded by donations by half of the nation who can put their money where their mouths are. The gov can match dollar for dollar donated funding to a limit. donated funds would cover the coverage cost of the program and, hopefully, expanded services but NOT salaries of any kind.

sure, the idea needs a bit more thought but I think this is a fresh idea outside of stagnating polarization. I have a hard time accepting that it's the states job to keep it's people healthy rather than the individual. However, perhaps the state could offer a basic service to preempt health issues.. Let those who want UHC invest donate their money rather than insist that a wealthy class pay for the chainsmoking, cheeseburger lifestyle of someone who wants equivalent coverage for nothing.
 

Forum List

Back
Top