so now that the government can mandate that we buy something . . .

[wmw999 2,453]

Quote

Nope
I value life
You dont

Pretty willing to judge others based on a single point, aren't you?

Pro-lifers value a fetus above the mother when the pregnancy is the result of birth control failure. But not in the case of rape or incest. So is it more a matter of protecting the fetus, or punishing the woman for willingly having sex?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[CanuckInUSA 0]

I would love to make fun of all you 'mericans telling you that you need to change your national anthem and remove the words "Land of the Free" from it as you clearly are losing your freedom. However that would be hypocritical if I did that because Canada also uses similar words "Glorious and Free" in our anthem and it appears that we 'nucks will also need to think about changing our anthem at the same time you are changing yours. It appears that the city of Vancouver, or should I say Bancouver has banned doorknobs from all new homes. I wish I was joking, but I am not. This is on the level. The doorknobs in Bancouver have banned doorknobs.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[davjohns 1]

wmw999

Quote

***Supreme Court vote upholds Texas abortion law

Tx cares about women

Bull-fucking-shit.

They care about abortion. Some honestly consider every pregnancy to be a baby; some care about the fact that their constituents care. If they cared about women, they'd be all over making all of the other services provided by those clinics available. But they don't.

Interesting how a vasectomy doesn't require admitting privileges; it's more invasive and dangerous. But no one is up in arms over that one, are they?

Wendy P.

OK. You guys made Wendy cuss. I'll get involved.

There is no war on women. That's a political ploy to mobilize emotions and votes. Are there people who want to control women, hate women, etc? I'm sure. I doubt any political party has the market cornered on those loonies.

Abortion is an incredibly difficult issue. Three people are involved. They all have their own difficulties.

It is not right that a woman has to go it alone just because she is female. It is not right that a man has no say in whether his child makes it to birth just because he is male. It is not right that the child has no say just because the other two are louder.

It is not right that women have to fight to get deadbeat fathers to meet their obligations. It is not right that fathers have to fight to have influence over their children (I'm assuming the parents are not married here). It is not right that children have parents who aren't unified in raising the child and looking out for its' needs.

Three peopel involved. Three different sets of issues and rights. No universal solution as far as I can tell.

Please stop pretending that someone else is a villain just because they come down on one of the three sides.

Calling names, making up false wars on a genre, insulting intelligence, pretending someone else is in the extreme because they take a side...none of this is helpful or persuades me that your position is reasonable or thought it. It's an emotional reaction. It is an emotional subject, so this is understandable. It just does't lead to a common solution. What is the purpose of debate if you never arrive at a mutually agreeable solution?

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[masterrig 1]

CanuckInUSA

I would love to make fun of all you 'mericans telling you that you need to change your national anthem and remove the words "Land of the Free" from it as you clearly are losing your freedom. However that would be hypocritical if I did that because Canada also uses similar words "Glorious and Free" in our anthem and it appears that we 'nucks will also need to think about changing our anthem at the same time you are changing yours. It appears that the city of Vancouver, or should I say Bancouver has banned doorknobs from all new homes. I wish I was joking, but I am not. This is on the level. The doorknobs in Bancouver have banned doorknobs.

Do singers of your anthem try to 'make it their own' like singers of our anthem do? Our anthem is tough enough to sing but some just ruin it.


Chuck

[rushmc 23]

wmw999

Quote

Nope
I value life
You dont

Pretty willing to judge others based on a single point, aren't you?

Pro-lifers value a fetus above the mother when the pregnancy is the result of birth control failure. But not in the case of rape or incest. So is it more a matter of protecting the fetus, or punishing the woman for willingly having sex?

Wendy P.

I am not judging anyone Wendy
I am not against abortion
I have stated this many times before
I am against abortion on demand
And the punishing a women comment???
This is kind of desperate coming from you
All I am for is responsibility for ones actions
Promiscuous behavior has consequences
Jumping out of airplanes has consequences
Drinking, doing drugs et al have consequences
Everyone should have to live with the choices they make
And if a procedure is needed to save the life of the mother, I am for it
I value life and I have an opinion on how our society should view it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,453]

Your statement was
I value life
You don't

Seems pretty clearcut to me that you were judging that he doesn't value life. There's not a lot to misunderstand in two sentences.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 23]

wmw999

Your statement was
I value life
You don't

Seems pretty clearcut to me that you were judging that he doesn't value life. There's not a lot to misunderstand in two sentences.

Wendy P.

Not alot to misunderstand about abortion either

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

rushmc

Not alot to misunderstand about abortion either

oh, we see a tremendous amount of misunderstanding (or outright lying) on physiology and statistics.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***Your statement was
I value life
You don't

Seems pretty clearcut to me that you were judging that he doesn't value life. There's not a lot to misunderstand in two sentences.

Wendy P.

Not alot to misunderstand about abortion either

You talk in so many circles it is painful.

(Waiting for: I know what I am, but what are you)

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

******Your statement was
I value life
You don't

Seems pretty clearcut to me that you were judging that he doesn't value life. There's not a lot to misunderstand in two sentences.

Wendy P.

Not alot to misunderstand about abortion either

You talk in so many circles it is painful.

(Waiting for: I know what I am, but what are you)

Stomp your feet if you wish
but dont hold your breath

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 221]

. . . and now they pushed the open enrollment date back 4 more weeks, to be two weeks behind the election.

Anyone want to guess why?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,006]

>You talk in so many circles it is painful.

Hook a generator to him and you could shut down the coal _and_ wind plants.

[Kennedy 0]

True or false: the government is now requiring that I spend my money to purchase a product that I may not want.

(Note use of the word product, indicating something purchased from a company, not service, indicating things to government does with my tax dollars)

I don't like the idea of the federal government having the authority to force me to purchase things. Why healthcare? More importantly, once they can force me to buy that, why stop there? What makes it different from anything else? What's to stop them from requiring me to buy another product. And another. And another...

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[tkhayes 348]

Already asked and answered a thousand times. Government requires you to buy a lot of things. You already know that.

And the slippery slope only goes so far. Your line in the sand just differs from other people's line in the sand.

[rushmc 23]

turtlespeed

. . . and now they pushed the open enrollment date back 4 more weeks, to be two weeks behind the election.

Anyone want to guess why?

It seems our executive branch writes laws now(again)

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Kennedy 0]

Bullshit. Everybody likes throwing out the seatbelt and car insurance example. That is nonsense. The are only required if I choose to buy a car. If I choose not to buy a car, I'm not required to buy them.

With ACA and healthcare, there is no choice. I am required to buy something or face governmental penalty.

What else am I required to buy that is not based on the if you do A, then and only then are you required to buy B, but only on the if you are breathing you must buy C?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

True or false: the government is now requiring that I spend my money to purchase a product that I may not want.
(snip)
I don't like the idea of the federal government having the authority to force me to purchase things. Why healthcare? More importantly, once they can force me to buy that, why stop there? What makes it different from anything else?

Some forms of insurance serve a dual purpose, protecting the purchaser and protecting the public. You are required to purchase auto insurance if you wish to own a vehicle and drive it on a public road. [I realize you can escape this by not ever driving your own vehicle, but that is an option available to relatively very few people.] There are two types of auto insurance, comprehensive, which covers your own losses, and liability, which covers people you may damage by your actions while driving. You are only required to carry liability, so the public is protected at least to some extent; it's entirely up to you if you want to insure yourself or your own vehicle.

When it comes to health insurance there is also both private risk and public risk, but they are more confounded than is the case with driving. People in emergency situations often must be treated immediately, not waiting until their check clears the bank or their insurance is verified. More often, either the rules that used to apply (such as not covering people with preexisting conditions, or lifetime limits) or expense excluded many people from obtaining privately purchased insurance. When they got sick, they would pay what they could, but often that meant a lifetime of impoverishment or bankruptcy, and the bill still didn't get paid so the balance was shifted to you and me. Of course, some people then figured out that they could skip the insurance and the bills, and just go straight to bankruptcy if they ever got seriously sick/injured. I have even heard skydivers say they would rather buy jumps than insurance, and would just declare bankruptcy if they got hurt. The only way to prevent cost shifting to you and me is to require that people pay full freight, which means they must either be insured or pay out of pocket in advance of any treatment.

So, which do you find least offensive (given that there are no perfect options)?
1. Everybody gets medical care for injury or severe illness, and the bill run up by the uninsured largely gets shifted to those with insurance (i.e. the system in place up until the ACA, and apparently still preferred by the GOP).
2. Nobody gets treated, ever, no matter how dire their circumstances, until they prove adequate insurance coverage or they pay in advance. This will, of course, require hospitals to literally refuse treatment to people and send them home, sometimes to die, untreated. This will also necessitate that people with communicable diseases such as TB either be allowed to walk around in public, exposing us all to disease, or require the law to confine those people. But at least you (and I) won't have to pay a dime for those slackers!
3. Require everybody to be insured. I'd be OK with exempting people who could post a bond sufficient to pay for any care out of pocket, say $500,000 or so.

Which one would be your preference?

As far as "other products" are concerned, I am not at risk of being forced to pay for your jumps, your computer, television, etc. There is no reason for the government to mandate anything of the sort, because there is no need to protect me from having to pay your way.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Kennedy

True or false: the government is now requiring that I spend my money to purchase a product that I may not want.

(Note use of the word product, indicating something purchased from a company, not service, indicating things to government does with my tax dollars)

I don't like the idea of the federal government having the authority to force me to purchase things. Why healthcare? More importantly, once they can force me to buy that, why stop there? What makes it different from anything else? What's to stop them from requiring me to buy another product. And another. And another...

You are right, next you are going to be required to buy another product. Because in all these other countries where there is some form of socialised health care, the governments have gone on and forced all kinds of other products to be bought....

Its a silly argument, at least not one based on reality.

So if you can get past that, we can discuss the merit of having health care for your society. I don't know enough about Obama Care to discuss if it is the right way of implementing it, from the little I know it doesn't seem thatw ay. But, I am a believer in some form of socialised health care. I believe it to be a foundation of a civilized society.

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

***True or false: the government is now requiring that I spend my money to purchase a product that I may not want.

(Note use of the word product, indicating something purchased from a company, not service, indicating things to government does with my tax dollars)

I don't like the idea of the federal government having the authority to force me to purchase things. Why healthcare? More importantly, once they can force me to buy that, why stop there? What makes it different from anything else? What's to stop them from requiring me to buy another product. And another. And another...

You are right, next you are going to be required to buy another product. Because in all these other countries where there is some form of socialised health care, the governments have gone on and forced all kinds of other products to be bought....

Its a silly argument, at least not one based on reality.

So if you can get past that, we can discuss the merit of having health care for your society. I don't know enough about Obama Care to discuss if it is the right way of implementing it, from the little I know it doesn't seem thatw ay. But, I am a believer in some form of socialised health care. I believe it to be a foundation of a civilized society.

Projecting your bull shit on the US does not make it right
We dont want it
We dont need it
It is NOT about HC

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Projecting your bull shit on the US does not make it right

It is just my opinion. I don't really care if you think it is right or not.

But, thank you for your well thought out response. I see you made it to four "sentences". Personal record?

[rushmc 23]

SkyDekker

Quote

Projecting your bull shit on the US does not make it right

It is just my opinion. I don't really care if you think it is right or not.

But, thank you for your well thought out response. I see you made it to four "sentences". Personal record?

No record for you
Go to insults when you lose the point
Like usual

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

***

Quote

Projecting your bull shit on the US does not make it right

You don't leave me much choice rush. Maybe if you added some actual substance to the conversation beyond:

you are bullshit
You don't know what you are talking about
you liberals are all idiots
You are all the same
I like when you post crap
etc etc

there would be the possibility of a discussion.

It is just my opinion. I don't really care if you think it is right or not.

But, thank you for your well thought out response. I see you made it to four "sentences". Personal record?

No record for you
Go to insults when you lose the point
Like usual

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Because in all these other countries where there is some form of socialised health care, the governments have gone on and forced all kinds of other products to be bought....

Its a silly argument, at least not one based on reality.

Like you had some substance

The "we have so you should too" childish point??

You serious?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 221]

SkyDekker

Quote

Projecting your bull shit on the US does not make it right

It is just my opinion. I don't really care if you think it is right or not.

But, thank you for your well thought out response. I see you made it to four "sentences". Personal record?

I'll make this short so everyone can pick it apart later.
1) Medicaid for those that can't afford anything else, with defined limits.
A) Already in place.
2) Medicare for all, paid for by a specific tax.
A) Pipe dream - but should have been how it was sold.*
3) Forced purchase of something that you don't understand or want
A) Unconstitutional - admittedly so as it was "Only Legal as a TAX"
4) Obamacare?
A) Should have been more thought out, and should be scrapped now.

* IF - and I emphasize "IF" the left would have passed some type of mandate that a Plan of Action be put in place by a certain date rather than a full roll-out, it might have been better. Forcing US Americans to do anything is not very productive. We are a stubborn lot, and will buck authority.

The fall out is going to be bad for everyone.

I am one of the unlucky ones that is affected, so my opinion is, by default, biased.

It is time to be reasonable about this.

I think we need to scrap the whole thing and come up with a basic necessities, medicare solution, that taxes everyone the same amount as what the minimum "healthcare plan" costs today and go from there. Then if you can, get on your own plan through your employer.

Ok, now I'll sit here and be picked apart, thanks.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[SkyDekker 1,465]

rushmc

Quote

Because in all these other countries where there is some form of socialised health care, the governments have gone on and forced all kinds of other products to be bought....

Its a silly argument, at least not one based on reality.

Like you had some substance

The "we have so you should too" childish point??

You serious?

Uhmm, the part you quoted is my disagreement with regards to the slippery slope argument.

The rest of my post didn't say, we ave it so you should to. It contained my opinion that a civilised society should have a form of socialised health care.

And yes, I am serious about that part.