Why have people come to believe health care is a "right" when it actually isn't?

[Truthseeker420]

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.-Romans 13:1

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.-Romans 13:1-7

Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.- Peter 2:13-17

 

[Meister]

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.-Romans 13:1

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.-Romans 13:1-7

Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.- Peter 2:13-17

 

[Flopper]

Bfgrn is apparently that stupid.

Healthcare IS a right. This country even affords that right to enemy combatants on the battlefield. I don't hear any of you regressive social Darwinist scum bags crying that YOUR tax dollars are paying for triage doctors saving the lives of terrorists. You just want to deny American men, women and children that right...And then you have the nerve to CALL yourselves 'patriots'

Whether we call health care a right or not isn't a matter of compassion. It's a matter of accuracy.

The right to healthcare, the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to a jury of your peers, the right to clean air and water, the right to knowledge, and a number of other rights are not expectantly guaranteed by the constitution. They are human rights or moral principals often canonized into laws.

 

[RKMBrown]

God Given right :

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’-Deuteronomy 15:7-11

American Constitution:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

Where in the bible does it say worship your government as your god and hand over to it your tithes for distribution to the needy?

Where in "preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness" is redistribute income at the point of a rifle?

you want to change the argument to worship,tithes and GOP talking points?

Why are you deflecting?

 

[dblack]

Healthcare IS a right. This country even affords that right to enemy combatants on the battlefield. I don't hear any of you regressive social Darwinist scum bags crying that YOUR tax dollars are paying for triage doctors saving the lives of terrorists. You just want to deny American men, women and children that right...And then you have the nerve to CALL yourselves 'patriots'

Whether we call health care a right or not isn't a matter of compassion. It's a matter of accuracy.

The right to healthcare, the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to a jury of your peers, the right to clean air and water, the right to knowledge, and a number of other rights are not expectantly guaranteed by the constitution. They are human rights or moral principals often canonized into laws.

The 'rights' to vote, to a fair trial, etc... aren't actually rights - they're provisions the state must follow in the due process of taking your rights away - ie convicting you of a crime. They are not services that must be provided on demand, whereas health care is. Calling health care a 'right' (btw, how much health care?) is just stupid Flopper. Also, a right to knowledge? WTF is that?

 

[Flopper]

Whether we call health care a right or not isn't a matter of compassion. It's a matter of accuracy.

The right to healthcare, the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to a jury of your peers, the right to clean air and water, the right to knowledge, and a number of other rights are not expectantly guaranteed by the constitution. They are human rights or moral principals often canonized into laws.

The 'rights' to vote, to a fair trial, etc... aren't actually rights - they're provisions the state must follow in the due process of taking your rights away - ie convicting you of a crime. They are not services that must be provided on demand, whereas health care is. Calling health care a 'right' (btw, how much health care?) is just stupid Flopper. Also, a right to knowledge? WTF is that?

By definition a right can be either a moral or legal entitlement. I don't claim that the public has a legal entitlement to healthcare. Most people I've spoke to on the subject believe there is moral entitlement to some basic level of healthcare and under come circumstances there should a legal entitlement. I agree with this.

 

[dblack]

The right to healthcare, the right to vote, the right to a fair trial, the right to a jury of your peers, the right to clean air and water, the right to knowledge, and a number of other rights are not expectantly guaranteed by the constitution. They are human rights or moral principals often canonized into laws.

The 'rights' to vote, to a fair trial, etc... aren't actually rights - they're provisions the state must follow in the due process of taking your rights away - ie convicting you of a crime. They are not services that must be provided on demand, whereas health care is. Calling health care a 'right' (btw, how much health care?) is just stupid Flopper. Also, a right to knowledge? WTF is that?

By definition a right can be either a moral or legal entitlement. I don't claim that the public has a legal entitlement to healthcare. Most people I've spoke to on the subject believe there is moral entitlement to some basic level of healthcare and under come circumstances there should a legal entitlement. I agree with this.

I think I understand your view, and it's sound - even if I don't necessarily agree. It's the deliberate equivocation on the different definitions I have an issue with. It seems you agree that, in any case, health care is not an inalienable right of the sort government is called upon to protect, and reformers gloss over that distinction in an attempt to get people accept health care as 'right' along side our fundamental freedoms. But it's just not the same sort of thing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

God Given right :

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’-Deuteronomy 15:7-11

American Constitution:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

Okay, first of all, that second quote is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, fucktard.

Second of all, notice how the Bible does NOT say: "If YOU should become poor, you shall open your hand to your brother and demand that HE lend YOU sufficient for YOUR need. HE shall give to YOU freely." There's a big difference between God instructing me on how to be a moral person, and God making it a natural right for YOU to demand that behavior of me.

 

[Cecilie1200]

God Given right :

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’-Deuteronomy 15:7-11

American Constitution:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

Where in the bible does it say worship your government as your god and hand over to it your tithes for distribution to the needy?

Where in "preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness" is redistribute income at the point of a rifle?

you want to change the argument to worship,tithes and GOP talking points?

Depends. Are you going to become more or less laughably inaccurate?

 

[emilynghiem]

Because they are believing an emotional argument instead of a logical one. If people thought about it, they would realize that in order to get health care someone has to provide it to them. Logically, we don't have a right to other people's labor. That would be called slavery. But people don't think about it logically. They think about it emotionally.

Dear Avatar: This is the BEST simplest expression I have heard. If you tell me where on here you give someone "rep" I assume that is different from thanks which I know how to do!

The one area where I would say health care is owed (by the person responsible)
if someone commits a crime by assaulting someone or causing an accident,
that person should pay for the costs of treatment.

I find it horrifying that people accept the state or public to pay for the costs of crimes
and injuries caused by lawless or reckless behavior, and will not charge people KNOWN to be the parties LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE.

Yet will push random costs of "other people's health care" onto taxpayers who did NOT commit any crimes, and fine them for not paying, taking away freedoms the public used to have, without any due process proving liability for these costs.

When I asked my coworkers, they did not believe in charging convicts for costs of crime, but felt that taxpayers were paying for ER and hospital costs anyway, why not buy insurance to cover that and make it cheaper? they basically didn't believe you could hold wrongdoers responsible financially, so they agreed to charge working people who make enough money and will follow the law; thus treating lawabiding citizens worse than criminals who aren't expected to pay and "punishing people for making more money" than criminals who cost taxpayers money and aren't required to work or pay any of it back.

They didn't count for
* costs of prisons that are higher than paying for education and housing or health care
* insurance doesn't pay for the costs that the patients still can't afford and end up on public assistance anyway. So we are still paying those costs, PLUS forced to pay private insurance companies that aren't providing the actual services or facilities but taking resources AWAY from the same money used to pay for the costs not covered by insurance or Obamacare

When I brought up this idea of requiring restitution OWED to taxpayers to pay for health care, so criminals are charged the costs they incur instead of punishing people who committed no crimes, the "blank look" on my coworkers faces was only matched by the "blank look" on mine when they had no idea what I was talking about.

They thought once you elected people, you were stuck with whatever policies got passed.
They did not know the difference between passing laws through Congress and federal govt vs. passing laws through the State where the people can vote directly on bills before they become law.

They were probably thinking I was from some other planet, thinking the people have direct responsibility for the laws and decisions about where our tax money goes.

I was thinking I need to move to another planet, because this looks hopeless!
I felt sad. For America, for everyone who is struggling to learn what is going
wrong and how can we fix it given what we have now to work with....

==============================================
If the politicians keep taking advantage of people who don't know the system, then each party should pay all the costs of the members who vote for them, collect their taxes and show them how much money it takes to really support their own at population under these handout policies. If they cannot support themselves under the money they put into the system they promote as a party, they need to change those policies so it is self-supporting and quit relying on the taxes and labor of other people to pay the difference.

if you borrow money from others while you work your way through school until you can support yourself, you need to pay it back. So the prison system and health care system should be run as schools where people work their way through school and either pay off restitution if they committed crimes that cost the public, or they earn their education and credits through internships and work-study programs to serve the public to pay for school.

 

[Bfgrn]

God Given right :

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’-Deuteronomy 15:7-11

American Constitution:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

Okay, first of all, that second quote is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, fucktard.

Second of all, notice how the Bible does NOT say: "If YOU should become poor, you shall open your hand to your brother and demand that HE lend YOU sufficient for YOUR need. HE shall give to YOU freely." There's a big difference between God instructing me on how to be a moral person, and God making it a natural right for YOU to demand that behavior of me.

Matthew 25:34-40
The Final Judgment

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

 

[Interpol]

This continues to be the one of the most redundant threads on this site because President Reagan made healthcare a right when he passed EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act).

Up until he passed that law, doctors and hospitals could refuse people. They could discriminate against poor people who did not have the means to pay for treatment.

Understanding that to be inhumane, President Reagan enshrined into law every American's right to healthcare services, even if they have no money.

Good on President Reagan for that one, but bad on him for not reforming healthcare insurance in a way so that the rest of us wouldn't have to pay for outrageously high healthcare services for people with no insurance. That is the biggest reason why our premiums skyrocketed for 25 straight years until President Obama began fixing it.

In the 15 years before Obamacare, our premiums went up anywhere between 12-20% every single year. It was about $3,000 for healthcare insurance 15 years ago, and it was almost $7,000 at the time Obamacare was passed.

In the last 2 years, our premiums have gone up a little under 4%. That's remarkable.

Healthcare is a right in America, but it is a right that comes with personal responsibility tied to it. Remember when Republicans were for personal responsibility?

This thread pretends to be a debate about this topic, but the debate was settled 30 years ago when Republican President Ronald Reagan enshrined healthcare as a right into law.

 

[RKMBrown]

Because they are believing an emotional argument instead of a logical one. If people thought about it, they would realize that in order to get health care someone has to provide it to them. Logically, we don't have a right to other people's labor. That would be called slavery. But people don't think about it logically. They think about it emotionally.

Dear Avatar: This is the BEST simplest expression I have heard. If you tell me where on here you give someone "rep" I assume that is different from thanks which I know how to do!

The one area where I would say health care is owed (by the person responsible)
if someone commits a crime by assaulting someone or causing an accident,
that person should pay for the costs of treatment.

I find it horrifying that people accept the state or public to pay for the costs of crimes
and injuries caused by lawless or reckless behavior, and will not charge people KNOWN to be the parties LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE.

Yet will push random costs of "other people's health care" onto taxpayers who did NOT commit any crimes, and fine them for not paying, taking away freedoms the public used to have, without any due process proving liability for these costs.

When I asked my coworkers, they did not believe in charging convicts for costs of crime, but felt that taxpayers were paying for ER and hospital costs anyway, why not buy insurance to cover that and make it cheaper? they basically didn't believe you could hold wrongdoers responsible financially, so they agreed to charge working people who make enough money and will follow the law; thus treating lawabiding citizens worse than criminals who aren't expected to pay and "punishing people for making more money" than criminals who cost taxpayers money and aren't required to work or pay any of it back.

They didn't count for
* costs of prisons that are higher than paying for education and housing or health care
* insurance doesn't pay for the costs that the patients still can't afford and end up on public assistance anyway. So we are still paying those costs, PLUS forced to pay private insurance companies that aren't providing the actual services or facilities but taking resources AWAY from the same money used to pay for the costs not covered by insurance or Obamacare

When I brought up this idea of requiring restitution OWED to taxpayers to pay for health care, so criminals are charged the costs they incur instead of punishing people who committed no crimes, the "blank look" on my coworkers faces was only matched by the "blank look" on mine when they had no idea what I was talking about.

They thought once you elected people, you were stuck with whatever policies got passed.
They did not know the difference between passing laws through Congress and federal govt vs. passing laws through the State where the people can vote directly on bills before they become law.

They were probably thinking I was from some other planet, thinking the people have direct responsibility for the laws and decisions about where our tax money goes.

I was thinking I need to move to another planet, because this looks hopeless!
I felt sad. For America, for everyone who is struggling to learn what is going
wrong and how can we fix it given what we have now to work with....

==============================================
If the politicians keep taking advantage of people who don't know the system, then each party should pay all the costs of the members who vote for them, collect their taxes and show them how much money it takes to really support their own at population under these handout policies. If they cannot support themselves under the money they put into the system they promote as a party, they need to change those policies so it is self-supporting and quit relying on the taxes and labor of other people to pay the difference.

if you borrow money from others while you work your way through school until you can support yourself, you need to pay it back. So the prison system and health care system should be run as schools where people work their way through school and either pay off restitution if they committed crimes that cost the public, or they earn their education and credits through internships and work-study programs to serve the public to pay for school.

Thanks for the interesting story. Yeah, it's sad how so many in this country are so poorly educated.

Oh, and the rep thing is the thumbs up thumbs down button on the top right corner of each message.

 

[RKMBrown]

This continues to be the one of the most redundant threads on this site because President Reagan made healthcare a right when he passed EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act).

Up until he passed that law, doctors and hospitals could refuse people. They could discriminate against poor people who did not have the means to pay for treatment.

Understanding that to be inhumane, President Reagan enshrined into law every American's right to healthcare services, even if they have no money.

Good on President Reagan for that one, but bad on him for not reforming healthcare insurance in a way so that the rest of us wouldn't have to pay for outrageously high healthcare services for people with no insurance. That is the biggest reason why our premiums skyrocketed for 25 straight years until President Obama began fixing it.

In the 15 years before Obamacare, our premiums went up anywhere between 12-20% every single year. It was about $3,000 for healthcare insurance 15 years ago, and it was almost $7,000 at the time Obamacare was passed.

In the last 2 years, our premiums have gone up a little under 4%. That's remarkable.

Healthcare is a right in America, but it is a right that comes with personal responsibility tied to it. Remember when Republicans were for personal responsibility?

This thread pretends to be a debate about this topic, but the debate was settled 30 years ago when Republican President Ronald Reagan enshrined healthcare as a right into law.

Your statement about Reagan is inaccurate.

 

[dblack]

This continues to be the one of the most redundant threads on this site because President Reagan made healthcare a right when he passed EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act).

No, he simply issued an unfunded mandate to hospitals.

 

[RKMBrown]

This continues to be the one of the most redundant threads on this site because President Reagan made healthcare a right when he passed EMTALA (Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act).

No, he simply issued an unfunded mandate to hospitals.

Which was not the same unfunded mandate that we are currently working under. People were still required to pay for their emergency health care costs back in the 80s.

 

[Flopper]

The 'rights' to vote, to a fair trial, etc... aren't actually rights - they're provisions the state must follow in the due process of taking your rights away - ie convicting you of a crime. They are not services that must be provided on demand, whereas health care is. Calling health care a 'right' (btw, how much health care?) is just stupid Flopper. Also, a right to knowledge? WTF is that?

By definition a right can be either a moral or legal entitlement. I don't claim that the public has a legal entitlement to healthcare. Most people I've spoke to on the subject believe there is moral entitlement to some basic level of healthcare and under come circumstances there should a legal entitlement. I agree with this.

I think I understand your view, and it's sound - even if I don't necessarily agree. It's the deliberate equivocation on the different definitions I have an issue with. It seems you agree that, in any case, health care is not an inalienable right of the sort government is called upon to protect, and reformers gloss over that distinction in an attempt to get people accept health care as 'right' along side our fundamental freedoms. But it's just not the same sort of thing.

Yes, that is what I mean. It's not the same thing. There is no constitutional right to healthcare. There are limited legal rights to healthcare such as Medicare, Medicaid, and EMTALA. Many people feel that it is morally right that some basic level of healthcare benefits should be universal. I think it's inevitable that this will become a legal right because we've been moving in that direction for over 50 years and I see nothing that's going to change it.

I believe the response to Obamacare is going to be legislation that makes healthcare more affordable for the middle class just as Obamacare made it more affordable for the poor. Such legislation is certainly not going to reduce benefits for the poor and thus will move the country closer a system of universal healthcare.

 

[Cecilie1200]

God Given right :

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him, because for this the Lord your God will bless you in all your work and in all that you undertake. For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’-Deuteronomy 15:7-11

American Constitution:

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independant, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ...

Okay, first of all, that second quote is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, fucktard.

Second of all, notice how the Bible does NOT say: "If YOU should become poor, you shall open your hand to your brother and demand that HE lend YOU sufficient for YOUR need. HE shall give to YOU freely." There's a big difference between God instructing me on how to be a moral person, and God making it a natural right for YOU to demand that behavior of me.

Matthew 25:34-40
The Final Judgment

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Again, God telling me what I should do to be a good Christian is very different from God giving YOU the right to demand that behavior from me for your benefit.

You might as well give it up. You can talk all day about what God expects of me, and you will NEVER, EVER find a passage that says, "Demand that your brother take care of you; you have a right to your brother's wealth and labor".

 

[Bfgrn]

Okay, first of all, that second quote is the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution, fucktard.

Second of all, notice how the Bible does NOT say: "If YOU should become poor, you shall open your hand to your brother and demand that HE lend YOU sufficient for YOUR need. HE shall give to YOU freely." There's a big difference between God instructing me on how to be a moral person, and God making it a natural right for YOU to demand that behavior of me.

Matthew 25:34-40
The Final Judgment

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Again, God telling me what I should do to be a good Christian is very different from God giving YOU the right to demand that behavior from me for your benefit.

You might as well give it up. You can talk all day about what God expects of me, and you will NEVER, EVER find a passage that says, "Demand that your brother take care of you; you have a right to your brother's wealth and labor".

What is it you don't understand about: ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’?

 

[dblack]

Matthew 25:34-40
The Final Judgment

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Again, God telling me what I should do to be a good Christian is very different from God giving YOU the right to demand that behavior from me for your benefit.

You might as well give it up. You can talk all day about what God expects of me, and you will NEVER, EVER find a passage that says, "Demand that your brother take care of you; you have a right to your brother's wealth and labor".

What is it you don't understand about: ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’?

I'm not a Christian, but I think the idea is that it's a personal, moral decision. Making it a compulsory government policy strips it of all meaning. It's no longer about compassion and morality, it's just obedience to the state.