Health Care as a Pro-Life Issue

“Health care is a right, not just a responsibility.” This teaching of the Catholic Church also happens to be a … Continued

“Health care is a right, not just a responsibility.” This teaching of the Catholic Church also happens to be a dividing line between Barack Obama and John McCain. I do not advocate deciding political matters by a single issue, but health care provokes a review of the Catholic mindset on important social policy.

At stake is the role of government. If health care is a right, then the burden falls on government to guarantee the services. Just like government ought to intervene if a person is denied voting rights or unfairly denied admission to school, health care becomes a matter for governmental vigilance. Denial of benefits, endless delays in delivery, one-sided bureaucratic decisions to refuse insurance and other current abuses intended to deprive clients of services would become crimes to be prosecuted in defense of the people’s rights. Rather than a question of the victim’s race or gender, this would become a matter of right for every person.

Certainly, there are many (Catholics included) who view universal health coverage as “big government intervention.” But in a democracy, government represents the people. Universal health care – or expanded insurance care on the way to universal coverage – in a true democracy is not intrusion of a third party between the people and an insurance company, but rather the people’s collective tool against injustice in pursuit of profits. This is the Catholic position, taught by the bishops of this country and in accord with papal teaching.

This Catholic view is currently defended in an interview conducted by the Catholic Digest with Senator Obama: “I’ve tried to apply the precepts of compassion and care for the vulnerable that are so central to Catholic teachings to my work, [such as in] making health care a right for all Americans — I was the sponsor in the state legislature for the Bernardin Amendment, named after Cardinal Bernardin, a wonderful figure in Chicago I had the opportunity to work with who said that health care should be a right.” Perhaps work as a community organizer in Chicago for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development and living in a Catholic rectory for half a year have played a role in Obama’s endorsement of the Catholic position.

The alternative to Obama’s platform is to view health care as a responsibility placed on individuals to provide for themselves and their family. Since the purpose is to contain the costs of health care, this is a valid approach. Instead of empowering the government to act for the people in defense of their rights, individual responsibility leaves everything to personal choice. That sounds fine, but it leaves the person with fewer tools to fight injustice. After all, one of the choices may be “to take a risk” and not seek any insurance at all. Living without health insurance virtually guarantees that an individual and a family could be deprived of health care.

Personal choice does not override the need for altruism, viz. love of neighbor. Society has a duty to control the spread of disease in order to “provide for the common welfare.” This is not merely a response to the contagious stomach flu for second graders: There are serious diseases that damage the common good, as for example, in the case of deadly epidemics. Moreover, it needs to be recognized that unless health care is viewed as right, health care insurance remains a money-making operation, leaving the unscrupulous able to exploit the helpless. A Catholic conscience does not ignore that the most common cause of bankruptcy is catastrophic illness that wipes out a lifetime of savings when not covered by insurance. Thus, Catholics are taught by faith to be critical of a laissez-faire attitude echoed by Senator McCain who advocates “…opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking.”

The Catholic Church teaches that health care is best viewed as a right and recent events demonstrate the wisdom of that teaching. Health care as a right is the Pro-Life position. This basic fact needs to be taken into the voting booth along with the abortion issue when deciding who will best implement a Catholic vision for society.

  • sertelt

    Health care is a pro-life issue, which is why Americans should oppose Obama. It’s very likely that our tax money would be used to pay for abortions under Obama’s plan and Obama voted against health care for pregnant women and their unborn children. See http://www.lifenews.com for details.

  • democratssuckcom

    I agree that health care is a pro-life issue, but it does not even begin to equal the slaughter of innocents that Barack Hussein Obama advocates. I think that we will make more strides in health care with a moderate John McCain than the ultra-liberal and dangerous Obama. How can you justify this pro-Obama diatribe when Obama has voted against bills in Illinois that would have guaranteed health care for a baby born alive after a failed abortion? Have you even researched his positions? I don’t think so. A person of faith could never vote for a person who is such an unabashed instrument of evil.Robert

  • cummingsjp

    Everybody has a right to health care. They also have the responsibility to pay for it. Government’s responsibility ends with making sure that people have access to it.

  • aschifter1

    Obama considers the life of all. He opposed the partial birth abortion bill because it failed to address the health and life of the mother. Neither goverment or your neighbor should have the right to decide between the life of the mother or the child when both hang in the balance. It is rather zealous of anyone to suggest such a thing. Repent! McCain on the other hand is responsible for the thousands of young American’s who died in Iraq and for the failures of providing vets proper health care coverage.He is further responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children killed in US Bombings and Terrorist Bombings as a result of not ensuring a proper security plan. However he is responsible for providing Iraqi children health care while many of our American children have none or substandard care.On dafur he has been vocal but has only recieved a grade of C by http://www.darfurscores.org All sentors including Obama need to step up action to stop the genocide.

  • SteveMD21

    Thank you. An opportunity for me to congratulate the Catholic church for remembering that Jesus spent His Life ministering to the sick, poor and despised of his society.McCain represents the most reprehensible part of America – those who talk about God and moral values, but really worship the Golden Calf of the God of Greed. That is their only goal – more and more wealth, to hell with everyone else. Sounds like the republican leadership are sociopathics.Remember that Sen McCain cheated on the wife who waited faithfully 6 years for him to return from Vietnam, and then left her to marry Cindy McCain because she is worth several hundred million $$$. That is proof enough of his character, or lack therof. And a perfect example of the people who are destroying the institution of marriage.And his health insurance plan – $5000 credit for a family – My previous employer just offered me entrance into their retiree medical plan for myself and my wife. Total Cost about $21000. And what would I do if had to get individual insurance and had to tell them that I have heart valve and aortic damage from high blood pressure – from decades of trying to earn a living in high pressure corporate life. They would tell me, and 50-75 million other Americans with pre-existing conditions to go take a hike, and maybe just go die. Fortunatly we have Medicare, but it isn’t cheap – we spend about $6500/yr for that medical insurance, fortunately that we can afford.McCain is like his party. Once a good man and a good party, it has been corrupted by the God of Greed. May they be banished to the hinterlands of poltics for decades. Until they clean house, including getting 100% rid of the people who feed them with some of the profits they made, while destroying our economy, and possibly giving us another 10 years of a new great depression.

  • rocky31

    That affordable health care is an issue on the minds of most Americans is no doubt – but Mr. Obama cannot have it both ways – his position on abortion and the rights of the unborn is clear and is unacceptable – as Catholics we cannot support him.

  • GodsGadfly

    Not only would our tax money support abortion, it would also support contraception, and American Catholics–on the Right and the Left–conveniently forget that contraception violates the Natural Law (paganism, Hinduism and Islam also oppose contraception, as does the Old Testament-“Be fruitful and multiply,” “happy the man who has filled his quiver with these arrows,” etc.). Thirdly, as a person with a genetic disorder and constant medical expenses, I would never want to be part of a socialist system. Every person I’ve ever communicated with from a country with socialized medicine–Canada, UK, or otherwise–has admitted–even while praising their own systems–that there are huge waiting lists for specialists, that people have to have waiting lists for what we consider routine procedures like MRIs and “normal” heart surgeries.People with rare disorders in socialist countries Try to save their money and pray for the opportunity to come to the US for surgery.That’s what you want for America? You consider that pro-life?

  • marcedward1

    cummingsjp writesI think there is a bigger issue here. The first is that the ‘health insurance’ industry seems only interested in two things – collecting money and denying payments when people get sick. Health insurance companies seem useless to me. If all they do is collect money and try as hard as they can to deny coverage, why have them at all? The government could do the same thing without the ‘denial of coverage’ part. democratssuckcom writes Liar. Obama has never advocated slaughtering innocents.Rocky31 writesAccept McCain will do no more for ‘the unborn’ than the Republicans have done for the last 38 years – nothing. Show me McCains plan to end legal abortion – I dare you! There is no difference between McCain and Obama on abortion when it comes to results, which matter a lot more than talk.

  • persiflage

    It’s great to see a Catholic point of view that correlates well with humanist values. This is of course where social pragmatism butts heads with orthodoxy (and where religious orthodoxy tries to shape social policy). In fact, ancient religious mythologies are not a good basis for developing contemporary secular policies that effect one and all in the grand scheme of things. We can see how said religious thinking becomes skewed in the direction of religious faith – and not always with the desired consequences hoped for in an egalitarian-based secular democracy. Prof. Stevens-Arroyo is clearly out of synch with the majority of ultra-conservative orthodox Catholics that tend to post here – nevertheless, his is a voice of reason in the miasma of doctrinaire religious thinking that clings to a medieval world view.National healthcare is just a good idea, plain and simple – and we will get there, one way or another….but it will cost the richest among us (both corporate and individuals) alot more than they’d care to pay…..thus we have complaints and dire warnings of imminent socialism, etc.The statistics prove that as each year passes, the rich get richer and everyone else either stagnates or drifts downward, socio-economically speaking – trickle down economics indeed! My feeling is that Obama and a democratic super-majority in Congress will reverse that inexorable upward movement of wealth. What could possibly be wrong with a more fair, just and prudent re-distribution of assets? When you give folks a license to steal, you get the housing, mortgage and banking fiascos that we’re currently living through – and many of the perpetrators are very, very rich. The rich folks are definitely not going away, but in the future a much larger percentage of those vast profits need not only more regulation and oversight, but re-distribution for the common good. National healthcare is one such excellent repository for re-directed monetary overflow in the future – and away from those already-bulging personal and coporate offshore bank accounts. Regarding right-to-life and pro-choice issue, Roe v Wade will remain the law of the land, and the Supreme Court will move decisively back toward the middle, where it belongs.

  • withouthavingseen

    Another excellent piece of obamapology. By this reasoning, Stalin was an excellent choice for the conscientious Catholic vote. Don’t get me wrong, I’m no McCainist, but frankly, all the lavish attempts by ‘progressive’ Catholics to explain to us how Obama is compatible with the Catholic faith because he is a socialist make me think of Shakespeare.”Methinks the lady doth protest too much.”yours,Ryan Haber

  • withouthavingseen

    And another thing:”Health care is a right, not just a responsibility.”I am not denying that this quotation represents a teaching of the Catholic Church, but I cannot find it anywhere. It is not scriptural, nor can I find it, or anything like it, in the Catechism. It seems anachronistic to suppose it will pop in Denzinger anywhere. Maybe it is from one of JPII’s encyclicals.Prof. Stevens-Arroyo cites it as a teaching of the Catholic Church. I wonder if he or anyone else will provide a citation to that effect from a magisterial document.Ryan Haber

  • marcedward1

    withouthavingseen writesWow stupid much? Obama wants wider availability of health care and he’s Stalin? Are you drunk? If you’re referring to abortion, explain how McCain would do anything about legal abortion with a Democratic senate – keep in mind McCain has spent no time at all doing anything about legal abortion in the past.”Don’t get me wrong, I’m no McCainist, but frankly, all the lavish attempts by ‘progressive’ Catholics to explain to us how Obama is compatible with the Catholic faith because he is a socialist”So Obama is a socialist?Methinks your rather a liar.

  • CCNL

    Somethings BO should have noted about reducing health care costs:It is obvious that intercourse and other sexual activities are out of control with over one million abortions and 19 million cases of STDs per year in the USA alone. from the CDC-2006How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start. And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Sounds good to me!!!! Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???

  • marcedward1

    CCNL writes Well, it’s obvious that too many people aren’t practicing safe sex. However ‘out of control’? That implies that the government ought to be controling how often we have sex. What about better parenting? I know countless people who got their ‘sex education off the street’ (FYI, I told my eldest about sex stuff before he was 8).”How in the world do we get this situation under control? A pill to temporarily eliminate the sex drive would be a good start.”They used to give boys in bording schools saltpeter so stop them from touching themselves. Seems rather intrusive to me, but maybe you like big government.”And teenagers and young adults must be constantly reminded of the dangers of sexual activity and that oral sex, birth control pills, condoms and chastity belts are no protection against STDs. “Yeah, nagging teenagers will get them to change their behavior. Obviously you’ve never had kids! oOral sex is much safer than sexual intercourse (no pregnancies, less spreading of STDs). Claiming that condoms offer ‘no protection’ is just a lie. Any parent who shops for a chastity belt for their kid is mentally ill. Any kid who want’s to wear a chastity belt is kinky.”Might a list of those having an STD posted on the Internet help? Sounds good to me!!!!”In a fascist country that might sound good. However we have RIGHTS in this country, including the right to privacy, let along the Amendments that clearly spell out people being ‘secure in their papers’. “Said names would remain until the STD has been eliminated with verification by a doctor. Lists of sexual predators are on-line. Is there a difference between these individuals and those having a STD having sexual relations while infected???”Uh, yeah – as in sexual predators are breaking the law and assaulting other people. BTW, has it crossed your mind that universal healthcare will help get more people treated for their STDs?

  • MikeL4

    Stephens-Arroyo agains distorts Catholic teaching to support a political candidate. Senator Obama is NOT a Pro-Life candidate by any stretching and distortion of the truth. Senator Obama believes in no restrictions on Abortion the greatest evil of our times. No Catholic can support this evil, no matter what other seemingly benign proposals Senator Obama might have. Health care as a right means basic life saving or preventative measures, basic health care for the dignity of human beings. Health care as a right does not include such things as vanity surgeries or abortions.

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 “Senator Obama is NOT a Pro-Life candidate by any stretching and distortion of the truth.”Not sure you meant to say what you just wrote. Senator Obama is for the legal right to get an abortion, that doesn’t make him ‘for abortion’. Of course being ‘pro-life’ is more than opposing abortion. Moreover, the is no difference between the results of a McCain or Obama presidency when it comes to legal abortion. Obama has said he’d not end legal abortion, and McCain won’t and can’t do anything to end legal abortion.As a propagandist, you’re not very good.

  • dadugganagain

    Healthcare is directly related to any pro-life position which purports to protect both potential and actual child birth. The infant mortality rate in this country is a national disgrace, placing us squarely with the third world, because of the lack of pre-natal and post-natal health care. Planned Parenthood clinics are often the only affordable community resource available to women, young and more mature, who are not eligible for medicaid, to get any kind of medical service, including just a physical check up. The no matter what anti-Obama, or anti-Democratic wing of the Karl Rove Catholics must be transmitting these messages from whatever other country or planet they really inhabit.

  • MikeL4

    Senator Obama’s apologists would have us believe that pro-choice and pro-abortion are two separate things. When you, like Senator Obama, take no legislative steps too limit an evil, when you use semantics like “health” exceptions to justify infanticide, I do believe that makes you pro-abortion. Senator Obama has never said that abortion is morally wrong. He is pro-abortion.

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 writes You mean people who believe in telling the truth.”would have us believe that pro-choice and pro-abortion are two separate things.”They are.”When you, like Senator Obama, take no legislative steps too limit an evil,”LOL – that’s a good one. “He is pro-abortion.”So is the Republican party, as judged by their ACTIONS. “If a practicing Catholic votes for him they are supporting someone who supports a great evil.”They would be, IF there was an alternative that was going to end legal abortion – there isnt!game-set-match

  • MikeL4

    Marcedward1

  • paulc2

    marc edward,

  • knjincvc

    Hummm!! How many posters know a woman who has had to make the difficult decision to have an abortion?How many know a woman who uses abortion as her primary method of birth control?How many are willing to help women carry their unborn child to birth and then help the woman raise her child?How many have adopted a child or know someone who has adopted a child?How many know families who have gone to another country to adopt a child?How many know someone whose child has died in Iraq?So instead of ranting about abortions…

  • clearbeard

    The most ironic element of the anti-abortionist’s position against Obama is that, by dispassionate and realistic estimates there will be far fewer abortions (legal and illegal combined) following Obama’s positions than there will be under McCain/Palin. If voters are going to be single-issue, be they gun rights advocates (Obama and especially Biden are both very much pro-second amendment rights) or anti-abortionists or anything else, they really should take special care to evaluate all sides and elements of their issue of choice, rather than blindly mouthing the talking points of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh (or MSNBC and the Daily Kos, to be fair).

  • clearbeard

    knjincvc wrote: How many know a woman who uses abortion as her primary method of birth control?How many are willing to help women carry their unborn child to birth and then help the woman raise her child?How many have adopted a child or know someone who has adopted a child?How many know families who have gone to another country to adopt a child?How many know someone whose child has died in Iraq?So instead of ranting about abortions…Well, I’ve never met anyone who used abortion as a “primary method of birth control.” Other than that, I fit all your categories, thank you for asking.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    According to William Roberts Johnston, who has compiled worldwide statistics on abortions (link provided in an earlier post), in the US 98% of abortions are for convenience; 88% of them by UNmarried women, around 76% of those under the age of 24. Of the 98% who seek out abortions of convenience, 30% do so for economic reasons. So social programs that help women who seek out abortion for economic reasons would help reduce abortions in only 30%. That leaves out 62% women who can afford to keep the children and yet choose abortion as their constitutional right.Only two percent of abortions are “hard cases” – due to rape, incest, illness in mother, fetal deformities.In West European countries, where social support is good in most countries, tighter abortion laws have had a direct impact in reducing the number of abortions.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Depending on the data one uses, “hard cases” could vary from 2-8%. That still leaves 92% abortions of convenience – 30% of them for economic reasons and 62% as constitutional right.Maybe pro-abortionists should stop referring to the plight of all pregnant women in the US, as if they were all living in a desperately poor third world country?

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    It is outright disingenuous to use Jesus as a scapegoat to justify abortions.”Thou shalt not kill” is clear enough and existed as a Commandment since the time of Moses.Psalm 139 was written by King David, long before the birth of Jesus.Luke chapter 1 describes the “ensoulment process” which begins with conception.There are specific laws in Judaism which punished sexual immorality – fornication and adultery – severely. Jesus stepped that up by forbidding even lustful glances, and forbidding divorce emphasizing that divorce was allowed only because of the hardness of people’s hearts, not because God intended it that way when He created human beings.Statistics show that 88% of abortions in the US are sought out by UNmarried women. If Jesus is being used as a scapegoat to justify abortions on the grounds he didn’t mention abortion as a sin, just as He didn’t mention pedophilia, why is His teaching forbidding even lustful glances, and prohibition of divorce not being followed? If everyone followed the teachings the number of abortions would drop at least by 88% automatically, the numbers sought by UNmarried women. That leaves only 12%, 30% or more of whom may be talked out of abortion with economic help, adoption options etc. “Thou shalt not take the name of Jesus in vain!”

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    To those who say abortion as a constitutional right cannot be wrong, NULONO, the pro-life atheist, had this response on 28 Oct 08:“Let’s also not forget that, in 1850, there was no consensus in America for outlawing slavery or allowing women to vote. There was also a time when consensus was that the earth is flat. In fact, world history is littered with examples where “consensus” simply meant that most of the fools were on one side.”

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Non-Christians only make up roughly about 25% of the US population. Of the roughly seventy five million non-Christians, how many would resort to abortion because their religious beliefs or lack of them do not respect the right to life of the child growing in the womb? How many Christian churches would interpret the Bible in a way that makes abortion, fornication and adultery acceptable (considering 88% of women seek abortions for pregnancies outside marriage)?

  • knjincvc

    clearbeard wrote;Well, I’ve never met anyone who used abortion as a “primary method of birth control.” Other than that, I fit all your categories, thank you for asking.OK! That is one!!!A lot of comments about how wrong abortion is but no comments about helping women who feel they have no other choice. I suggest those who feel so strongly about abortion work as a volunteer in a local hospital to experience the tragedy women experience when they make their decision.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    More than FOUR THOUSAND unborn babies are killed each DAY in the US – 1.2 MILLION per year.Only a fraction of the number used to be killed before Roe vs Wade, even less before the advent of the sexual revolution.The sexual revolution and Roe vs Wade has turned out to be literally deadly for unborn children.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    knjincvc A lot of comments about how wrong abortion is but no comments about helping women who feel they have no other choice.I suggest those who feel so strongly about abortion work as a volunteer in a local hospital to experience the tragedy women experience when they make their decision.October 29, 2008 1:10 AM_________________________________________Unconvincing sanctimonius platitude. The attitude “Abortion as a constitutional right,” with all the rationalizations, and dehumanization of the growing child that accompanies it, and compunction about resorting to abortion are mutually incompatible. Nobody is expected to feel guilty about exercising a right and the vast majority of women don’t.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Abortion should be viewed as abuse of power: the power a woman has over her defenseless, unborn child, who is dependent on her body for the first nine months of its life.

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    Abortion should be viewed as abuse of power: the power a woman has over her defenseless, unborn child, who is dependent on her body for its very life, for the first nine months of its life. The child continues to need help in order to grow and develop after it is born. The only reason the woman is not able to abuse her power from the point of the child’s birth – the law of the land stands in the way.

  • marcedward1

    CCNL Writes “And why should we have to pay for the sexual misconduct of others? Universal health care insurance or any kind of health insurance should not cover STDs of any person who knows about their disease but continues to practice unsafe sex.”1) Health Care ought to cover everything, not just those ills that we judge to be ‘unfair’ or ‘nobody’s fault’. Universal Health Care that doesn’t cover politically incorrect illnesses is hardly universal.”And “monks’dust”/saltpeter used in monasteries/boys’ schools. Scientific references please!!”Oh please, you’re speculating about drugs to suppress sexuality (which would probably have massive amounts of hormones) and I’m the one not being scientific? “We have no qualms about the use of ED drugs but have qualms about temporary disablement of the sex drive via safe drugs?? RCC priests would love to have such a drug available.”Ed drugs are taken voluntarily, while most people wouldn’t want to take drugs that make them less than human. Not sure why RCC priests would love such a drug.”As would most parents.”Well, parents who are more concerned with controlling their kids than their kids health. I can only imagine what it would be like growing up, not dealing with one’s sexuality until one gets out of the house. Think it would be a lot worse for a guy to wait till he’s 18 and suddenly all his sexual desires manifest all at once because his parents can’t make him take ‘the pill’ any more.

  • marcedward1

    ProLifeActivistBorn59 writes ‘only a fraction’ is rather misleading. What is that fraction? 1/10th? 5/4ths? I bet you have no idea what so ever!

  • marcedward1

    MikeL4 writesOne assumes you are beginning your sentence with a tradmark McCain-ism to be ironic?”No where have I endorsed any candidate.”Dintinction w/out a difference, as you only attack Obama’s position (pro-legal abortion) and not McCain’s consistant lack of action (under Republicans no limits on legal abortion).”I do object, however to those who willing look to the Church to support their political beliefs on the War, but turn their back on the Church when it comes to Abortion.”It’s called politics. One can only associate with people who agree with you on EVERYTHING. This is how the Bush Administration picked people to run the Iraqi occupation. Would you hire the worst plumber in town to work on your house if he happened to be the only pro-life plumber in town? One can also deal with people with whom you share many values, but not all, and get a lot more done. “Senator Obama supports the right to kill a child up past viability if the “mental health” of the mother might be adversely affected.”Got a quote to back that up? I’ve never heard that before.”To support a candidate who supports this, supports that position, in turns supports this evil. Any practicing Catholic who supports Senator Obama supports that position.”Point is moot as there is no difference between McCain and Obama on abortion when it comes to results. If you disagree, please explain how McCain would end legal abortion if elected.

  • HaveItYourWay

    The problem is that only those who enjoy the right to life bother about the right to healthcare. So, first things first …

  • ProLifeActivistBorn59

    I do not stand in judgment of any woman, but there needs to be shift in the attitude of women (and men) towards the barbaric practice of killing the defenseless unborn child and using sophisticated vocabulary to disguise the heinousness of the act, and going to the extent of calling it a woman’s right. Women who complain because they have suffered under the abuse of power by men should know better than to turn around and become abusers themselves, even murderers of their own completely innocent and defenseless children.

  • marcedward1

    ProLifeActivistBorn59 – as I thought you provided no information.

  • marcedward1

    ProLifeActivistBorn59 – you provided some URLs – so what? You pretend to care about all these ‘babies’ being killed, but you’re too lazy to copy and paste the information that ‘proves’ your case?

  • CCNL

    And in summary, we have these important rules that have evolved over 60,000 years of human history:”Thou Shalt Not Kill””Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery””Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Wife”

  • kert1

    Can someone explain to me how we make Health Care a Right? What happens when it bankrupts america and we can’t afford it? Whose responsibility is it then.Is having enough food a right?

  • marcedward1

    kert1 writes Health care isn’t a ‘right’ any more than education is a ‘right’. However a healthy and educated population is in the national interest, so it is good policy.