Let me tell you a story. There once was man named Tom who had a friend named Sam. Sam was Tom's best friend and had known Tom all his life. Tom and Sam would go on regular walks together. Sam would watch Tom's house when Tom was gone, and sometimes Sam would bring Tom his paper. Unfortunately for Sam he aged faster than Tom. With age came medical treatments and Tom would take Sam to his doctor's appointments. The doctors were always helpful, but as Sam grew older they became less willing to provide the care that Sam needed and Tom felt he deserved. Toward the end of Sam's life the doctors refused to care for Sam and told Tom that Sam had lived a long, full life and should be allowed to pass away so that they could focus their efforts on those who could still contribute to society.
Now in this story Sam is a dog, and Tom is his owner. However, under the public option (Obama health care) plan (with the doctors as the government) Sam could be someone's child, father, grandfather, other relative, or life-long friend. Who would want to be told by the government that someone close to them had served their purpose and should be refused life-saving treatment and counseled to passed away? Yet this treatment is a considerable part of the foundation of the Obama health care plan--rationed health care, death panels, waiting periods etc. The current health care system may not be perfect, but it is leaps and bounds better than any public option that has been or is currently being created.
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
2 comments:
Hi Vigilant American ~ I noticed on your conservatism part of this website, the role of government includes emergency services (eg ambulance). But if I'm uninsured and poor, and get an ambulance to a hospital, who is going to help me? What good is emergency service when I can't affort the service it is taking me to?
I believe that health care is a human right, not simply for those who can afford it. Other countries do health care for every citizen in a successful way, without compromsing the democracy and well being of their societies (eg france, britian, new zealand).
Thanks for your voice, it is important. As a permanent resident of America, but a citizen of a country with socialised medicine, I do not understand your perspective. I believe this issue is a social justice issue, and comes down to a matter of fairness. Life and death fairness.
Reply to Anonymous. You are mis-informed. Hospitals here in
America do not, and have not ever turned away anyone who has needed medical care in a life-threatening situation. In fact it is well known that Mexican women who are pregnant come to America as illegal aliens to have their baby knowing full well that they will not be denied medical treatment. Their goal is that their child is then born a citizen of the United States. Be sure that you are well informed of all of the facts about the country you are a 'permanent resident' of before you begin making judgements. I personally know people from Canada (who have a socialized healthcare government system) who come here to the U.S. to receive medical treatment because they know they will receive the complete care they desire. Once you try to make everyone the same, like a herd of cattle, you remove competition and the drive to be the best and succeed. Doctors who are forced by the government to receieve the same pay will soon cease to care about being the best and giving the best care. That is simple human nature. True freedom is self-reliance and the freedom and motivationn (from oneself, and from outside circumstances) to be the best that you can be. Right now our beloved country is in a downward slide to socialism/fascism, and as we watch, as far as I know, there isn't another 'United States' we can turn to or run to in this entire world.
Post a Comment