Is health care a right?

[Norman]

Yes I am feeling very bad for the socialist indoctrination these people received at the public school. So far that's the only new thing we have learned here, sad that their teachers decided to rape them every day, with their eyes, words and god knows what else.. #MarxistEducationSurvivor

 

[Seawytch]

Yes...I said we are guaranteed "life" as an inalienable right. I never said it came from our constitution. That's your wrong assumption because you're a hack.

Here you go:

We are guaranteed a right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"

The Constitution says "life, liberty and property." And that means government cannot take those from you without "due process of law."

Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

It says government cannot take those from you. That government has to take property from other citizens and give it to you is clearly not there. It says government cannot take those from you, without due process of law

So? I wasn't quoting the Constitution so what does it have to do with anything? I said, and I repeat, we are guaranteed life as an inalienable right. I never said where we are guaranteed it. Since I mentioned that some countries actually put it in their Constitutions, you assumed that I was also talking about ours. I wasn't.

Of course, you're just a partisan hack so I might as well be talking to the wall.

You can't admit you're wrong no matter how blatantly obviously it's presented to you, can you, Joe? Is that true in your real life too?

As for guaranteed "life," do you understand that means government cannot deprive you of it without due process of law? Government cannot take your life, it's not government's job to go out and figure out how to give it to you by plundering other people for you.

Do you understand the difference or not? Do you know what due process of law means? Do you really want the next generation to get the crappy government education that you did that you can't coherently engage in simple conversations? I can't dumb this down any more, we're at the point you have to grasp the point

There's nothing to admit to. You assumed incorrectly. You do that a lot...because you're a partisan hack.

You said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I "assumed incorrectly" you were referring to the Declaration of Independence?

OK, Sport, what were you quoting then? It wasn't the Constitution which doesn't say that

No hack. You assumed I thought I was referring to the Constitution. I knew I wasn't...making your partisan hack assumption wrong as usual.

 

[longknife]

I have a question.

There is an individual who eats mountains of junk food and slurps down sugared drinks. That person smokes three packs of cigarettes per day and, whenever leaving the house, ends up at places where s/he consumes prodigious amounts of alcohol. Then does the same thing at home.

That person is grossly obese and needs mechanical aids to get around. Has Type II Diabetes and requires medications and instruments to control it. Has the start of emphysema and requires an oxygen tank. Liver functions poorly and requires medical attention. As cannot work due to "disabilities" is facing severe discomfort if not aided.

This person lives this lifestyle BY CHOICE!

Why should I therefore be required to spend my hard-earned money to support him/her?

Explain to me by what RIGHT s/he takes MY $$$$$ to support his/her lifestyle!!!

 

[Centinel]

I have a question.

There is an individual who eats mountains of junk food and slurps down sugared drinks. That person smokes three packs of cigarettes per day and, whenever leaving the house, ends up at places where s/he consumes prodigious amounts of alcohol. Then does the same thing at home.

That person is grossly obese and needs mechanical aids to get around. Has Type II Diabetes and requires medications and instruments to control it. Has the start of emphysema and requires an oxygen tank. Liver functions poorly and requires medical attention. As cannot work due to "disabilities" is facing severe discomfort if not aided.

This person lives this lifestyle BY CHOICE!

Why should I therefore be required to spend my hard-earned money to support him/her?

Explain to me by what RIGHT s/he takes MY $$$$$ to support his/her lifestyle!!!

S/he has no right at all to your property. Nobody has the right to the property of another.

 

[kaz]

Here you go:

The Constitution says "life, liberty and property." And that means government cannot take those from you without "due process of law."

Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

It says government cannot take those from you. That government has to take property from other citizens and give it to you is clearly not there. It says government cannot take those from you, without due process of law

So? I wasn't quoting the Constitution so what does it have to do with anything? I said, and I repeat, we are guaranteed life as an inalienable right. I never said where we are guaranteed it. Since I mentioned that some countries actually put it in their Constitutions, you assumed that I was also talking about ours. I wasn't.

Of course, you're just a partisan hack so I might as well be talking to the wall.

You can't admit you're wrong no matter how blatantly obviously it's presented to you, can you, Joe? Is that true in your real life too?

As for guaranteed "life," do you understand that means government cannot deprive you of it without due process of law? Government cannot take your life, it's not government's job to go out and figure out how to give it to you by plundering other people for you.

Do you understand the difference or not? Do you know what due process of law means? Do you really want the next generation to get the crappy government education that you did that you can't coherently engage in simple conversations? I can't dumb this down any more, we're at the point you have to grasp the point

There's nothing to admit to. You assumed incorrectly. You do that a lot...because you're a partisan hack.

You said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I "assumed incorrectly" you were referring to the Declaration of Independence?

OK, Sport, what were you quoting then? It wasn't the Constitution which doesn't say that

No hack. You assumed I thought I was referring to the Constitution. I knew I wasn't...making your partisan hack assumption wrong as usual.

I addressed that several times. This isn't the first time you've been told you have an inability to man up to admitting you are wrong, is it?

 

[Seawytch]

So? I wasn't quoting the Constitution so what does it have to do with anything? I said, and I repeat, we are guaranteed life as an inalienable right. I never said where we are guaranteed it. Since I mentioned that some countries actually put it in their Constitutions, you assumed that I was also talking about ours. I wasn't.

Of course, you're just a partisan hack so I might as well be talking to the wall.

You can't admit you're wrong no matter how blatantly obviously it's presented to you, can you, Joe? Is that true in your real life too?

As for guaranteed "life," do you understand that means government cannot deprive you of it without due process of law? Government cannot take your life, it's not government's job to go out and figure out how to give it to you by plundering other people for you.

Do you understand the difference or not? Do you know what due process of law means? Do you really want the next generation to get the crappy government education that you did that you can't coherently engage in simple conversations? I can't dumb this down any more, we're at the point you have to grasp the point

There's nothing to admit to. You assumed incorrectly. You do that a lot...because you're a partisan hack.

You said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I "assumed incorrectly" you were referring to the Declaration of Independence?

OK, Sport, what were you quoting then? It wasn't the Constitution which doesn't say that

No hack. You assumed I thought I was referring to the Constitution. I knew I wasn't...making your partisan hack assumption wrong as usual.

I addressed that several times. This isn't the first time you've been told you have an inability to man up to admitting you are wrong, is it?

You misinterpreted what I said many times. That's been established.

Never once did I state I was referring to the US Constitution.

 

[kaz]

You can't admit you're wrong no matter how blatantly obviously it's presented to you, can you, Joe? Is that true in your real life too?

As for guaranteed "life," do you understand that means government cannot deprive you of it without due process of law? Government cannot take your life, it's not government's job to go out and figure out how to give it to you by plundering other people for you.

Do you understand the difference or not? Do you know what due process of law means? Do you really want the next generation to get the crappy government education that you did that you can't coherently engage in simple conversations? I can't dumb this down any more, we're at the point you have to grasp the point

There's nothing to admit to. You assumed incorrectly. You do that a lot...because you're a partisan hack.

You said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I "assumed incorrectly" you were referring to the Declaration of Independence?

OK, Sport, what were you quoting then? It wasn't the Constitution which doesn't say that

No hack. You assumed I thought I was referring to the Constitution. I knew I wasn't...making your partisan hack assumption wrong as usual.

I addressed that several times. This isn't the first time you've been told you have an inability to man up to admitting you are wrong, is it?

You misinterpreted what I said many times. That's been established.

Never once did I state I was referring to the US Constitution.

You really are functionally illiterate. I know you said you weren't referring to the Constitution, I keep saying that. What you can't answer is what you were referring to that protects our rights and isn't the Constitution. Keep up

 

[Seawytch]

There's nothing to admit to. You assumed incorrectly. You do that a lot...because you're a partisan hack.

You said "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I "assumed incorrectly" you were referring to the Declaration of Independence?

OK, Sport, what were you quoting then? It wasn't the Constitution which doesn't say that

No hack. You assumed I thought I was referring to the Constitution. I knew I wasn't...making your partisan hack assumption wrong as usual.

I addressed that several times. This isn't the first time you've been told you have an inability to man up to admitting you are wrong, is it?

You misinterpreted what I said many times. That's been established.

Never once did I state I was referring to the US Constitution.

You really are functionally illiterate. I know you said you weren't referring to the Constitution, I keep saying that. What you can't answer is what you were referring to that protects our rights and isn't the Constitution. Keep up

Of course i know where it came from. How silly.

 

[FaerieGodfather]

It's hard to argue that one person can have a "right" to anything that has to be provided by another person-- anything, indeed, that a person cannot do for themselves. On the other hand, it is clear that government-subsidized healthcare increases liberty by increasing every person's ability to improve themselves and contribute to society; it increases liberty in the same sense that free education increases liberty, because it enables people to do more with their lives.