MajorOz wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
MajorOz wrote:
"Tom Littleton" wrote:
What John doesn't see is that when it comes to healthcare, we are talking
about something that ought to be a birthright of citizenship,
It may be a great idea for some and philosophically hardwired into
them, but it ain't a universally held view, and to assume it is, or
even that it should be, is just plain stupid.
There it is, distilled into easy-to-read roffian format. The health
care debate in a nutshell. Decent human beings who care for their
fellow Americans feel strongly that health care is a right and the
rugged individualists feel strongly that it's every man for himself.

Rather than create a strawman, if it must be rephrased, please try to
do it in accordance with original intent, to wit:

"Some decent human beings who care for their fellow Americans feel
strongly that health care is a right. Other decent human beings who
care for their fellow Americans feel strongly the health care is not a
right."

If affordable health care isn't a right of citizenship then it
is necessarily a privilege available only to those who can afford
it. I can't understand how a decent human being could be so callous,
unfeeling and so lacking in compassion that they would deny health
care to those unable to pony up the bucks for it.

I don't know from philosophical hardwires but it's pretty easy for
me to see where the moral high ground is in this debate.

The above is a textbook illustration of how a misstatement of intent
will create a statement supportive or a pre-extablished position.

cheers

oz, always willing to help

Willing to help whom ? You're certainly not willing to help those
poor folks who can't afford health care.

--
Ken Fortenberry