Yet you continue to dick ride. So whatever i dont respond to you so proof is in the pudding i dont give a **** or think about you like you think about me
yeah, many people conflate natural rights and inalienable rights with citizen rights Maybe a simplistic way to strike a difference is the Inalienable Rights Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence vs the Bill of Rights
Freedom could be given in ancient Babylon Police protection could have been given in ancient Egypt Ancient Rome was a republic In which one of those places could you receive a coronary angioplasty?receive
thats fine. You don’t have to respond or even accept it, but my apology stands. I think multiple people here were struggling to follow what you are saying, thus I realized it wasn’t cool to be dickish about it.
Dont give a ****. Dont take any dick riding seriously. Others understand even though after ASSuming. Why would i give a **** about you understanding Dud i alert you in the o.p.? You cant even help yourself I do like calling dick riding out. Jesus i know somebody thinks about me. Just read what Riley wrote
I haven’t read all 5 pages of this thread to see if it’s been mentioned but the government made healthcare a right in 1986 when Reagan signed EMTALA. That law gave everyone the right to service in the ER for free which has led to billions in uncompensated care annually which of course has led to increased costs to those that do pay via their insurance. Which led to higher and higher premiums. Health insurance as a concept is a farce because it cannot follow the same rules as every other insurance pool. Primarily because of preexisting conditions and not everyone who has claims pays premiums. (Medicaid and the uninsured.) The sooner this country gets over their insipid socialism boogeyman and joins the rest of the civilized world with universal healthcare the better off we will be.
If you went to a temple of Asclepius you could receive the best medical service available free of charge. Including surgeries. It's where Hippocrates and Galen served.
That doesn't answer the question. If there were no doctors could their services be guranteed. Im pretty sure there were doctors in the 60s so that doesn't answer the question.
Trust me: It wasn't clear you were making a point about political strategy It would have been clearer had you started with the last sentence in your OP, and followed with "And that selling point should be ... blah blah" Spoiler I can see why you started with talking about what a Right is because the selling point was Discrimination based on pre-existing or not. Abd then you're saying the Dems shouldn't muddy the political debate with what a Right is. But in that tangent about what a Right Is and Isn't you muddied the waters about what this thread is about ... In that effort you buried your main point at the end, and didn't even complete it there. Rather your one mention of "discrimination" is in a hard to follow sentence. can you see now from our eyes that we were confused what main point was
The government cannot guarantee any service if people were not willing to take on the vocation. That includes the military, police, firefighters, etc. We wouldn’t even have a government to guarantee services if people didn’t want to be government employees. If your argument is that healthcare cannot be a right because what if there are no doctors to force to serve; then the same argument can be made that nothing is a right without people to do the job.
Government existence is for security. If there was no security there would not be a government So yes it HAS TO PROVIDE SECURITY
