Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
since you haven't responded to my debate topic or made the thread....and i can't make a thread in the head to head debate subforum....
the topic is:
is the current h/c bill constitutional
let's debate bfgrn
Head to head debate
- Thread starter Cancel 2018. 3
- Start date
since you haven't responded to my debate topic or made the thread....and i can't make a thread in the head to head debate subforum....
the topic is:
is the current h/c bill constitutional
let's debate bfgrn
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Bfgrn
New member
I thought Topspin was the one who posted the message. I was wrong.
How did you retrieve a deleted message that only I could edit Yurt?
Bfgrn
New member
That is where it will end up.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
i didn't retrieve anything...i REPLIED to your post that was still there....
yeah...i'm topspin....btw...when did you challenge him to a one on one debate? i bet you didn't....
drink much?
Bfgrn
New member
OK Yurt, it seems you are too timid to start. I will...
Here is a reasonable position from:
Founding Director
Yale University Prevention Research Center
Director & Founder
Integrative Medicine Center
at Griffin Hospital
Principal Inventor
Overall Nutritional Quality Index (ONQI); Chief Science Officer, NuVal, LLC
Founder & President
Turn the Tide Foundation, Inc.
http://www.davidkatzmd.com/articles.aspx
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Preventive Medicine Column
December 17, 2010
Left, Right, Wrong: Health Care, and What the Constitution Meant to Say
The contents of the U.S. Constitution shouldn't change when seen through a red lens, or blue. It makes reading the Constitution sound like reading tea leaves.
In the case of the controversial provision- the requirement that everyone buy health insurance or be penalized- what DID the Constitution mean to say?
Almost certainly: not a thing! When our Constitution was drafted, health insurance wasn't on anybody's radar (neither, for that matter, was radar). Medicine was primitive; hospitals were all but nonexistent; long-term care institutions did not exist. There was no dialysis, no organ transplantation, no open heart surgery, no angioplasty. Acute threat to life or limb generally meant...loss of life or limb. And when the medical services of the day were required and of any use, the barter system took care of the costs more often than not.
One need not be a Constitutional scholar (I hasten to note: I am not!) to know that the Constitution was silent on health care insurance for the same reason it was silent on Internet use. Such concerns were not part of the world in which the document was drafted.
But the Constitution is, of course, vocal about government powers and their limits. The Constitution says the government can't force you to buy anything.
Or something like that. The states can force you to buy auto insurance if you drive a car. But, they can't force you to drive- or own- a car. So- free will prevails! The Constitution is OK with this.
The state can't force you to buy or rent an abode. But the authorities can hassle you interminably if you attempt to rest your head elsewhere- just ask a homeless person in any major city. Let's call this one a bit gray.
Judge Hudson in Virginia stated that the government lacks authority "...to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market." The crux of the matter, then, is involuntarily entering the stream of commerce.
Alrighty, then; what about involuntarily bleeding to death? What about involuntary meningitis, or heart failure? Few people I know volunteer for medical calamities. Medical calamities are, quite predictably, involuntary. And there's the rub.
On any given day, any of us can be involuntarily thrust into the "stream" of health care commerce by an involuntary disaster. Then the only question is: will we, or won't we, have a paddle?
When life and limb are imperiled, we intervene- and worry about the bill afterward. Human decency requires nothing less. But afterward, there IS a bill- and someone has to pay it.
Leaving out the details, that someone will be us. It will be paid through our taxes, or paid in our health premiums. In other words, we, the insured, ARE being forced to 'enter the stream of commerce' involuntarily, to pay the bills of others.
That's the problem with thinking of health care- and the insurance to pay for it- as if it were any other commodity. People can just say no to any other commodity. They can't say 'no' to resuscitation from cardiac arrest - at least not until after they are a beneficiary of it!
More
Here is a reasonable position from:
Founding Director
Yale University Prevention Research Center
Director & Founder
Integrative Medicine Center
at Griffin Hospital
Principal Inventor
Overall Nutritional Quality Index (ONQI); Chief Science Officer, NuVal, LLC
Founder & President
Turn the Tide Foundation, Inc.
http://www.davidkatzmd.com/articles.aspx
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Preventive Medicine Column
December 17, 2010
Left, Right, Wrong: Health Care, and What the Constitution Meant to Say
The contents of the U.S. Constitution shouldn't change when seen through a red lens, or blue. It makes reading the Constitution sound like reading tea leaves.
In the case of the controversial provision- the requirement that everyone buy health insurance or be penalized- what DID the Constitution mean to say?
Almost certainly: not a thing! When our Constitution was drafted, health insurance wasn't on anybody's radar (neither, for that matter, was radar). Medicine was primitive; hospitals were all but nonexistent; long-term care institutions did not exist. There was no dialysis, no organ transplantation, no open heart surgery, no angioplasty. Acute threat to life or limb generally meant...loss of life or limb. And when the medical services of the day were required and of any use, the barter system took care of the costs more often than not.
One need not be a Constitutional scholar (I hasten to note: I am not!) to know that the Constitution was silent on health care insurance for the same reason it was silent on Internet use. Such concerns were not part of the world in which the document was drafted.
But the Constitution is, of course, vocal about government powers and their limits. The Constitution says the government can't force you to buy anything.
Or something like that. The states can force you to buy auto insurance if you drive a car. But, they can't force you to drive- or own- a car. So- free will prevails! The Constitution is OK with this.
The state can't force you to buy or rent an abode. But the authorities can hassle you interminably if you attempt to rest your head elsewhere- just ask a homeless person in any major city. Let's call this one a bit gray.
Judge Hudson in Virginia stated that the government lacks authority "...to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market." The crux of the matter, then, is involuntarily entering the stream of commerce.
Alrighty, then; what about involuntarily bleeding to death? What about involuntary meningitis, or heart failure? Few people I know volunteer for medical calamities. Medical calamities are, quite predictably, involuntary. And there's the rub.
On any given day, any of us can be involuntarily thrust into the "stream" of health care commerce by an involuntary disaster. Then the only question is: will we, or won't we, have a paddle?
When life and limb are imperiled, we intervene- and worry about the bill afterward. Human decency requires nothing less. But afterward, there IS a bill- and someone has to pay it.
Leaving out the details, that someone will be us. It will be paid through our taxes, or paid in our health premiums. In other words, we, the insured, ARE being forced to 'enter the stream of commerce' involuntarily, to pay the bills of others.
That's the problem with thinking of health care- and the insurance to pay for it- as if it were any other commodity. People can just say no to any other commodity. They can't say 'no' to resuscitation from cardiac arrest - at least not until after they are a beneficiary of it!
More
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
um...............a debate is your words bfgrn......not a LINK of someone else's words
care to try again
you can use sources, but you can't copy without citing. since you've started this off by using a source and not your opinion, i'm going to assume you can't debate. so.....the rules are:
your opinion - no source
someone elses's opinion - give a cite
i understand opinions in this area might be similar to a source, but, no word for word, unless a cite.
care to try again
you can use sources, but you can't copy without citing. since you've started this off by using a source and not your opinion, i'm going to assume you can't debate. so.....the rules are:
your opinion - no source
someone elses's opinion - give a cite
i understand opinions in this area might be similar to a source, but, no word for word, unless a cite.
Beefy
Worst gambler ever
Well it looks like we're off to a dashing start!
How about this as a rebuttal Yurt:
http://www.someonesopiniononwhyhealthcareisunconstitutional.bs
How about this as a rebuttal Yurt:
http://www.someonesopiniononwhyhealthcareisunconstitutional.bs
Bfgrn
New member
Bullshit Yurt. You don't get to make the rules. I read the doctor's paper and I support every word of it. And I DID cite...
So give me your position. I really don't care if you use your words or you cite someone else's...they are fucking words Yurt. The idea is to air out different sides of the issue. You are so insecure that you are trying to CONTROL the way it's debated... So now we know your need to control is based in your deep insecurity.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Bfgrn
New member
Join the debate...go for it smart guy...
Beefy
Worst gambler ever
What debate? You simply regurgitated someone else's opinion and have yet to add a dingleberry to this thread.
Here's my stance then you ginger pimpleneck:
http://www.steadyhealth.com/I_have_two_pimples_on_my_neck_for_months_that_dont_go_away__t100983.html
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
LOL Yurt...I see you have already surrendered...
'No thank you' = surrender/per Yurt
Yurt's new Avatar
no stupid...a no thank you and no rebuttal = surrender in a debate
and you still haven't put forth your DEBATE....all you have is other people's words....you can't formulate an opinion on your own
Bfgrn
New member
Here's what you do...stick your neck in a vise and close it up until the jaws touch...the pimples will be gone.