Why Socialism can never die

[hoosierdaddy]

Yes, you're entitled to your opinion but it came across very sarcastic and disrespectful to me.  That's just the way it seemed.  If you weren't, then that's fine. 

It doesn't matter if someone is lazy or not.  They are Canadian citizens and thus, have as much right to health care as you have to state your opinion.

Maybe liberals lie (they do) but so do conservatives.  I like to use proper terms when I am discussing something.  I have no use for "lie"berals or "con"servatives.  Just like we have to avoid msn speak, spelling mistakes, etc. on here I think we should avoid the above. I don't believe you will agree with me but that's fine.  Such is the beauty of  being

 

[paracowboy]

health care is not a "Right". It is a privilige. One we can extend, and should whenever possible, but it is not an inherent Right, akin to Liberty or Equality.

That is one of the major problems with our pampered society today: an inability to differentiate between Rights and priviliges, as well as a complete disregard for Duty and Responsibility.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So let me get this straight, because I was lucky enough to be born here, it is my obligation to mount up on my white steed, lower my visor and go off spending part of the 60% of my gross wages in taxes to the lazy citizens that can't be bothered to fend for themselves? No one has the 'right' to live off the avails of others.

 

[Nemo888]

The argument between socialism and capitalism is one of the foundations of our democracy. The synthesis of these two creates an egalitarian progressive society. The pendulum swings too far either way occasionally, but the system tends to self regulate. Too much of either clearly stops a country from being successful.

 

[TMM]

My "utopia" would be to paraphrase Dubček - "Capitalism with a human heart."

 

[a_majoor]

I'm just wondering if people that are against socialism are against our health care system?  Our system has it's problems but I believe in the fundamental right of all citizens to have access to health care.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

There is the real problem in a nutshell. The great thinkers of the Enlightenment knew that Rights were precious and few, and were to be defieded against all challenges, even to the point of rising up and using physical force to defend you rights and yourselves. Our Leftist "thinkers" will accord every privilage with the ambit of a "Right", thus watering down the entire concept and rendering it almost meaningless.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

health care is not a "Right". It is a privilige. One we can extend, and should whenever possible, but it is not an inherent Right, akin to Liberty or Equality.

That is one of the major problems with our pampered society today: an inability to differentiate between Rights and priviliges, as well as a complete disregard for Duty and Responsibility.

I don't see it as pampered though.  I see it as an obligation.  I am a Christian and if someone cannot afford health care (as many can't in countries where health care is a for profit business), it is my obligation to help them.  Maybe there are people who disregard Duty and Responsibility but I am not one of them.  It is my Duty and Responsibility as a Christian and as a Canadian to help others.  I also see health care as being part of the right to Life.  Glad we could be a little more respectful.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

There is the real problem in a nutshell. The great thinkers of the Enlightenment knew that Rights were precious and few, and were to be defieded against all challenges, even to the point of rising up and using physical force to defend you rights and yourselves. Our Leftist "thinkers" will accord every privilage with the ambit of a "Right", thus watering down the entire concept and rendering it almost meaningless.

Wouldn't health care fall under the category of the certain inalienable right to Life?  I would think it does.

 

[paracowboy]

Glad we could be a little more respectful.

my 'respectfulness' is no different in that post than the previous. You'll get used to it.

I don't see it as pampered though.  I see it as an obligation.  I am a Christian and if someone cannot afford health care (as many can't in countries where health care is a for profit business), it is my obligation to help them.  Maybe there are people who disregard Duty and Responsibility but I am not one of them.  It is my Duty and Responsibility as a Christian and as a Canadian to help others.  I also see health care as being part of the right to Life.

health care is not part of the Right to life. You have no Right to demand I take care of you. You have a Responsibility to take care of yourself. I have the Duty to ensure you have the opportunity. And your Christianity has no bearing on that, any more than someone's being a Buddhist. Religion deals in faith, it has nothing to do with politics or economics.
DEFINITELY not politics, as that is probably the least holy of all Canadian past times.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

my 'respectfulness' is no different in that post than the previous. You'll get used to it.
health care is not part of the Right to life. You have no Right to demand I take care of you. You have a Responsibility to take care of yourself. I have the Duty to ensure you have the opportunity. And your Christianity has no bearing on that, any more than someone's being a Buddhist. Religion deals in faith, it has nothing to do with politics or economics.
DEFINITELY not politics, as that is probably the least holy of all Canadian past times.

I imagine I'll get used to it.  I was being sarcastic...you'll get used to it.

Health care is not part of the Right to Life?  Says you.  I say differently.  I have every right to demand you help me out and every obligation to help out anyone who needs my help.  It goes with being a Canadian citizen.

My Christianity bears on everything, including politics.  Religion deals in faith, which works itself out through politics and economics.  I can understand your viewpoint a little better now.  You see politics as a "past time".  I see it as something much more important that can have an impact on life and death.

modified for spelling (why didn't spell check catch "of" spelled incorrectly?)

 

[paracowboy]

I have every right to demand you help me out and every obligation to help out anyone who needs my help.  It goes with being a Canadian citizen.

You can demand anything, but I am not obligated to meet it. You do not have the Right to me doing anything. I meet my Responsibility to your Rights by not actively squashing them. That's it. I can't take away your Right to free speech. I can't arbitrarily kill you. But, I do NOT have to provide you with any sort of medical assistance. I can stand there and watch you bleed to death.

My Christianity bears on everything, including politics.

  to you. Not to anyone else. That is why we have a secular government.

Religion deals in faith, which works itself out through politics and economics.

  No. It doesn't. They are entirely seperate entities. Diff'rent critters altogether.

I can understand your viewpoint a little better now.  You see politics as a "past time".  I see it as something much more important that can have an impact on life and death.

you don't see much at all, since what was obviously a joke slipped right on past you like you were the goalie for the Sharks.

modified for spelling (why didn't spell check catch "of" spelled incorrectly?)

I dunno. What was the mis-spelling?

 

[hoosierdaddy]

Well, I disagree with you on everything you said.  That's fine, I'm not going to get into a pissing match. I just disagree, that's all.

As for the spell check, I had the word "of" spelled "fo" and it didn't catch it.

I was under the impression that we were supposed to treat each other with respect but if put up with my sarcasm then I will put up with yours.  You have a great night.

 

[a_majoor]

The "Right to Life" as articulated by the Founding Fathers and other Enlightenment thinkers means you have the right to live without some King/Lord/Dictator/Imperator/Executive committee etc. being able to arbitrarily kill you.

The thinkers in the 1700's had emerged from an age where Europeans enthusiastically killed each other for speaking different languages, worshipping Christ in different ways, being for or against particular policies, decrees, fees, taxes etc.

Since in 21rst century Canada it is very possible for a health care Bureaucrat to arbitraily kill you by putting you on a waiting list, your "Right to life" is jeopardized in the sense noted above (i.e. the threat of arbitrary death).

What you see as your religious duty to extend charity towards others is not a right, nor is it an obligation on people like Paracowboy or myself (although you can rest assured I will pull over to the side of the road to attend to accidents and perform other acts which I feel are important [note the obligation rests on my values and choices, not yours, Paracowboy's, Stephen Harper's or anyone else]). Certainly religious values can shape a political unit, and indeed the post which opened this topic explicitly compares the values and belief systems of Socialists to religious faith, since they can continue to operate without reference to external events (Christians have been swept by Millenialist fever several times awaiting the return of Jesus Christ; Socialists don't seem to think Vladimir Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il, the Killing fields, the Harvest of Sorrow, the annexation of Eastern Europe etc. etc. reflects on their ideas)

 

[hoosierdaddy]

I see what you're saying.  I agree with some and the rest is something to think about. 

About the bureaucrats arbitrarily killing us by putting us on a waiting list, I would agree with you on that.  That is what I was referring to when I conceded that our system has problems.  I believe everyone has the right to basic health care and nobody should be put on a waiting list.  There is no excuse why anyone in Canada should be put on waiting lists when Americans don't; at the same time the U.S. is ten times the size of Canada population wise.

 

[a_majoor]

Sigh

There is no excuse why anyone in Canada should be put on waiting lists when Americans don't; at the same time the U.S. is ten times the size of Canada population wise.

The American health care system is a bewildering mixture of public, private, publi-private partnerships and so on. You have potentially a lot of different health care choices in the United States, except for wealthy users of private clinics (like Paul Martin Jr and Jack Layton) the vast majorety of Canadian have no health care choices.

 

[hoosierdaddy]

*yawn*

I stopped reading at "Sigh".

 

[paracowboy]

Well, I disagree with you on everything you said.

of course you do. You are a devout Christian, and are getting your Rights and Responsibilites as a citizen of a constitutional monarchy confused with your perceived obligations as a member of your Christian denomination. While not mutually incompatible, they are not indivisible. In fact, the former must take precedence over the latter. Otherwise, we run into problems with the Right to Worship.

While most modern nations with a democratic form of government were founded by Christians, they are almost all secular, with a distinct seperation of Church and State. For good reason. 

As for the spell check, I had the word "of" spelled "fo" and it didn't catch it.

I don't know why that happened. Why don't you pm the site owner, Mike Bobbitt? I'm sure he'd want to know about any glitches in the system.

I was under the impression that we were supposed to treat each other with respect

there is respectful of others, and then there is just being dull. I try to never be boring, and therefore am seldom bored. This is a site for soldiers, populated by soldiers, and run by soldiers. Think of it like the Jr Ranks, but with a few more rules, as it is visible to the public, and therefore we under scrutiny from civilians. There's no need to be overly politically correct, and it's best not to be overly sensitive, or you'll not have much fun. Like I said, you'll get used to it. I'm actually behaving myself quite a bit.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>But it is my belief that citizens have the right to health care and it should be provided when the tax dollars are going towards it. Health care is a RIGHT, not a for profit business.

Learn a bit about "negative" and "positive" rights.  Wiki can probably help.  If health care is a right, then I'm just about ready to quit my job and enjoy my leisure.  Welfare is a right, too.  That looks after pretty much everything I need.  Now, where do I collect my rights?

This "obligation" you believe you have...how strong is it?  I mean, obviously you aren't giving away every penny to those less fortunate than you - there are very, very many of them and I think it unlikely you could assuage their needs before exhausting your resources - and living an exceedingly simple frugal life, right?  Perhaps you should revisit the use of the word "obligation".

 

[hoosierdaddy]

of course you do. You are a devout Christian, and are getting your Rights and Responsibilites as a citizen of a constitutional monarchy confused with your perceived obligations as a member of your Christian denomination. While not mutually incompatible, they are not indivisible. In fact, the former must take precedence over the latter. Otherwise, we run into problems with the Right to Worship.

I don't believe I'm getting them confused so much as I'm putting them all together because I believe in the importance of both.

While most modern nations with a democratic form of government were founded by Christians, they are almost all secular, with a distinct seperation of Church and State. For good reason. 

Trust me.  I'm a Baptist; I believe in separation of Church and State.  Separation of Church and State does not negate the need for a state having a standard of morality.  Many of our laws come from Judeo-Christian beliefs and if we used (what appears to be) your definition of Separation of Church and State, we would have to eliminate those laws.  Separation of Church and State does not mean that people of faith have to avoid politics, refrain from political office, or voting according to their beliefs.  It means that the State will have no authority or control over the Church and the Church will have no control or authority over the State, in order to avoid situations such as England (Anglican Church) and Muslim nations (Islam governments).


I don't know why that happened. Why don't you pm the site owner, Mike Bobbitt? I'm sure he'd want to know about any glitches in the system.

I may do that if it happens again.

there is respectful of others, and then there is just being dull. I try to never be boring, and therefore am seldom bored. This is a site for soldiers, populated by soldiers, and run by soldiers. Think of it like the Jr Ranks, but with a few more rules, as it is visible to the public, and therefore we under scrutiny from civilians. There's no need to be overly politically correct, and it's best not to be overly sensitive, or you'll not have much fun. Like I said, you'll get used to it. I'm actually behaving myself quite a bit.

Fair enough then.  I will try to be respectful without being dull myself.  I am not about to be banned over every little thing though, so I guess I have to find that line not to cross.  Forgive me if I'm dull for a little while.   8)

 

[hoosierdaddy]

>But it is my belief that citizens have the right to health care and it should be provided when the tax dollars are going towards it. Health care is a RIGHT, not a for profit business.

Learn a bit about "negative" and "positive" rights.  Wiki can probably help.  If health care is a right, then I'm just about ready to quit my job and enjoy my leisure.  Welfare is a right, too.  That looks after pretty much everything I need.  Now, where do I collect my rights?

In a sense, welfare is right.  It is a necessity to help those who cannot help themselves.  However, when someone is able to work then they should work.  I don't know, you tell me.  Where do you collect your rights?

This "obligation" you believe you have...how strong is it?  I mean, obviously you aren't giving away every penny to those less fortunate than you - there are very, very many of them and I think it unlikely you could assuage their needs before exhausting your resources - and living an exceedingly simple frugal life, right?  Perhaps you should revisit the use of the word "obligation".

Of course I'm not giving away every penny to those less fortunate than me.  But I pay my taxes, which everyone else should do as well.  And I believe if someone wants to live in this country they should pay their taxes without complaining about where they go to (as in the health care system).  There is no need for me to revisit the word "obligation" but maybe you could meditate on the words "love your neighbour as yourself"?