The liberal mythology of healthcare being a right

It doesn't. Government doesn't protect ALL inalienable rights. It flat out condemns many. I think that's what you guys are getting hung up on. Inalienable doesn't meant must never be violated. It's just an indication that it's not something that is granted by an authority. Again, the point is to distinguish freedoms, from grants or favors.

If that makes sense to you, then you're truly an idiot.
 
It's amazing how dumb you are...

I would strongly recommend you look up the makeup of congress over the past 30 years.

I don't even know where to begin with how ignorant you are...

Ahhh,... another beer fart heard from.

Hmm... let's see... I got a GOP Majority 16 out of the 30 in the Senate, I got a Democratic Majority in 18 out of 30 in the House With majorities in both houses split 50/50 at 12 years a piece.

Now let's look at the Executive Branch, shall we? 20 out of the 30 years, we've had Republicans in charge with 8 years of Clinton in between that actually MADE PROGRESS, only to be squandered by Junior to the point of economic collapse(with the help of a GOP supermajority 6 out of HIS 8 years).

:lol:

16 out of 20 :lol:

You surely are an idiot.

100 members of Senate.

435 members of House.

Don't even attempt to quantify numbers with me pal - you're not talking to some uneducated progressive here, I'm not your protégé.

Only an idiot would take all congresses (despite majority) add them together and then come up with an equation.. Not to mention I don't even know where you began or ended...

Not to mention that is not how government works..

What the fuck is wrong with you??

Nothing.... You are a fucking moron who changes the goalposts every time someone either accepts your challenge or challenges you. Go fuck yourself.
 
To bring this back to the OP, health care can't be - no matter how much we want it be so - an unalienable right.

This thread didn't start with any discussion about health care was an inalienable right. It merely asks whether health care is a right, period.

Right. I assume it was brought up because it's widely accepted that the kinds of rights our government is supposed to protect are limited to inalienable rights. As opposed to rights that aren't inalienable - like health care.
 
Ahhh,... another beer fart heard from.

Hmm... let's see... I got a GOP Majority 16 out of the 30 in the Senate, I got a Democratic Majority in 18 out of 30 in the House With majorities in both houses split 50/50 at 12 years a piece.

Now let's look at the Executive Branch, shall we? 20 out of the 30 years, we've had Republicans in charge with 8 years of Clinton in between that actually MADE PROGRESS, only to be squandered by Junior to the point of economic collapse(with the help of a GOP supermajority 6 out of HIS 8 years).

:lol:

16 out of 20 :lol:

You surely are an idiot.

100 members of Senate.

435 members of House.

Don't even attempt to quantify numbers with me pal - you're not talking to some uneducated progressive here, I'm not your protégé.

Only an idiot would take all congresses (despite majority) add them together and then come up with an equation.. Not to mention I don't even know where you began or ended...

Not to mention that is not how government works..

What the fuck is wrong with you??

Nothing.... You are a fucking moron who changes the goalposts every time someone either accepts your challenge or challenges you. Go fuck yourself.

You didn't challenge me...

You dishonestly averaged in an attempt to make your argument seem logical.
 
It doesn't. Government doesn't protect ALL inalienable rights. It flat out condemns many. I think that's what you guys are getting hung up on. Inalienable doesn't meant must never be violated. It's just an indication that it's not something that is granted by an authority. Again, the point is to distinguish freedoms, from grants or favors.

If that makes sense to you, then you're truly an idiot.

I guess that settles it then.
 
People, usually collectivists just make up what their rights are...

They're too lazy to read the constitution so they just make shit up.

Of course the SCOTUS will agree...

I suppose 1 man is an army yet 100 men are wrong but 100 men are correct and 1 man is wrong.

9 people decide what is just and injust.
 
People, usually collectivists just make up what their rights are...

They're too lazy to read the constitution so they just make shit up.

Of course the SCOTUS will agree...

I suppose 1 man is an army yet 100 men are wrong but 100 men are correct and 1 man is wrong.

9 people decide what is just and injust.

Your constitution was written over 230 years ago. Why do some 200+ year old dead guys get to decide what a right is or isn't. It does have an amendment process ya know
 
:lol:

16 out of 20 :lol:

You surely are an idiot.

100 members of Senate.

435 members of House.

Don't even attempt to quantify numbers with me pal - you're not talking to some uneducated progressive here, I'm not your protégé.

Only an idiot would take all congresses (despite majority) add them together and then come up with an equation.. Not to mention I don't even know where you began or ended...

Not to mention that is not how government works..

What the fuck is wrong with you??

Nothing.... You are a fucking moron who changes the goalposts every time someone either accepts your challenge or challenges you. Go fuck yourself.

You didn't challenge me...

You dishonestly averaged in an attempt to make your argument seem logical.

Bullshit... We are talking about 30 years of History... 16 out of those 30 years the GOP had the majority in the senate. That means that the Dems had a majority 14 out of those 30 in the Senate.

In the House... it was 18 out of 30 in favor of the Democrats... that means that the GOP had the Majority 12 out of 30.

There were 12 years/party in which they controlled BOTH the House and the Senate.

In the Executive Branch... The GOP had control of a full 1/3 of the Federal government 20 out of 30 years.

It's not my fault you can't fucking read and have to have it spoon fed for you.

EDIT: I STARTED at the Beginning of Reagan's first term, BTW.
 
It doesn't. Government doesn't protect ALL inalienable rights. It flat out condemns many. I think that's what you guys are getting hung up on. Inalienable doesn't meant must never be violated. It's just an indication that it's not something that is granted by an authority. Again, the point is to distinguish freedoms, from grants or favors.

If that makes sense to you, then you're truly an idiot.

It takes someone with a couple brain cells to rub together to understand what he's saying. That's why you don't get it.
 
. Socialism doesn't work.

Neither does Capitalism. You think your financial meltdowm was caused by Socialism?

Yep, it certainly was. It was caused by government forcing banks to grant mortgages to people who couldn't pay them.

A mixture of both works. Each on its own is doomed to failure...

Wrong. the empirical evidence shows that the closer to the free market a country gets, the more prosperous it becomes. Government is nothing but a giant leach sucking the life out of the economy.
 
People, usually collectivists just make up what their rights are...

They're too lazy to read the constitution so they just make shit up.

Of course the SCOTUS will agree...

I suppose 1 man is an army yet 100 men are wrong but 100 men are correct and 1 man is wrong.

9 people decide what is just and injust.

Your constitution was written over 230 years ago. Why do some 200+ year old dead guys get to decide what a right is or isn't. It does have an amendment process ya know

May as well ask why anarchy is illogical??

I mean they only happen to be our founding documents and truly the basis of law outside the Magna Carta - which is of course a prerequisite to the Bill of Rights.
 

Well, we've been talking about that. No point in going over the debate - you can read it and respond. But I will ask you this. If health care is a right, what about food, shelter, clothing, or any of the other necessities of life? Shouldn't the be rights too?

These morons claim that a right is whatever the government says it is, but healthcare is a right even though the government hasn't made it one as of yet.

I've come across mules that are easier to teach.
 
It doesn't. Government doesn't protect ALL inalienable rights. It flat out condemns many. I think that's what you guys are getting hung up on. Inalienable doesn't meant must never be violated. It's just an indication that it's not something that is granted by an authority. Again, the point is to distinguish freedoms, from grants or favors.

If that makes sense to you, then you're truly an idiot.

It takes someone with a couple brain cells to rub together to understand what he's saying. That's why you don't get it.

Someone with a couple brain cells to rub together would see the inherent contradictory nature of his stance.
 
Your constitution was written over 230 years ago. Why do some 200+ year old dead guys get to decide what a right is or isn't. It does have an amendment process ya know


Sure it does. So when did the amendment making healthcare a right get passed?
 
Nothing.... You are a fucking moron who changes the goalposts every time someone either accepts your challenge or challenges you. Go fuck yourself.

You didn't challenge me...

You dishonestly averaged in an attempt to make your argument seem logical.

Bullshit... We are talking about 30 years of History... 16 out of those 30 years the GOP had the majority in the senate. That means that the Dems had a majority 14 out of those 30 in the Senate.

In the House... it was 18 out of 30 in favor of the Democrats... that means that the GOP had the Majority 12 out of 30.

There were 12 years/party in which they controlled BOTH the House and the Senate.

In the Executive Branch... The GOP had control of a full 1/3 of the Federal government 20 out of 30 years.

It's not my fault you can't fucking read and have to have it spoon fed for you.

EDIT: I STARTED at the Beginning of Reagan's first term, BTW.

:lol:

Last time I checked the House wrote bills and the Senate passed them and it was up to the President to sign off on the bills manifesting them into law...

The Senate needs the check from the House....

The Senate could authorize 95 trillion dollars in spending but that doesn't necessarily mean the house would justify such a lunatic act or even cut the check.

You'd figure that was common knowledge.
 

Forum List

Back
Top