Skip to comments.The “right” to healthcare does not require a doctor to work for free
Posted on 11/25/2012 4:12:14 PM PST by ReformationFan
After the election, a lot of people are excited that they can now get healthcare. Or maybe not quite yet, but by 2014, when ObamaCare is fully implemented.
The only problem is that healthcare is not like an Obama phone. The phones are all made by a standard process in a factory, probably in China, and they usually work.
You can use them to call a healthcare provider. But you usually get the if this is an emergency, hang up and dial 911, followed by the phone menu.
How will this change with ObamaCare? Doesnt that give you a right to care?
Whenever someone tells me about the right to healthcare, I ask, From whom? From me? This question exposes this right for the robbery and slavery that it is. Take it to the next step. Do you really want to exercise your right to healthcare on a physician who doesnt want any part of this bargain? What kind of care do you think youll receive?
(Excerpt) Read more at medcitynews.com ...
Postitive rights require slaves. Not coincidental that the Democrats love positive rights.
And when I was in residency I got paid peanuts.
Did I go into medicine to get rich? No.
But I also didn't go into medicine and make incredible sacrifices of life, hard work, and time, to be considered some kind of "slave" to greedy, entitled POS's.
As an MD, I agree. I think people have no idea what’s coming their way - a rude shock to their sense of entitlement, lives of increasing frustration and desperation, and a nose dive in their life expectancy.
Food is needed to sustain life so it must be a right, right? When will Obama be giving free food to everyone within our borders?
That same “nursing shortage” is being used today to induce the unwary to sign up for nursing degrees at colleges and universities. Amazing how many people believe that health care is still a guaranteed job. Local hospitals have hundreds of applications for every position advertised as “open”....but ask about it and somehow they never seem to find a qualified person.
The people making those comments probably pay no Federal income tax at all, and have not subsidized anyone.
Well, there is already breakfast, lunch, and dinner at some public schools, amd tens of millions on foodstamps.
An entire nation of thieves and parasites is what America has become.
Whose right is health care? Do you think it's yours?
Congressman Anthony Weiner has said that health care is not a commodity. If it isn't a commodity then do doctors and nurses have rights? Assigning health care the status of a right makes health care workers slaves to that right who must serve it. On what ground could a health care worker refuse to provide their products and services since that would violate the patient's "basic human right to health care."
That is a direct loss of individual rights for health care providers. The collective right of the people to receive health care would supersede the provider's individual right to set fees and hours or to change their occupational status or even decide how to apply their skills and knowledge if taken to its logical extreme. A collective right, by practical definition, is a state right because it is a right that is created and given by the government to those it chooses to give it to. It is not a natural right possessed by each person protected by the Constitution from the government. It is also a collective/state right by virtue of the fact that it would supersede individual rights when the two come into conflict. How else would the government view a right that it created and administers vs. one it has no control over?
Of course it isn't stated in any bill that a patient's right to care supersedes a provider's right to set fees and hours etc, but it doesn't need to. Rights, as always, are adjudicated in the courts. The Health Care Reform bills simply establish the foundation for the courts to rule in favor of the collective right.
Weiners view is collectivist, fascist and totalitarian. Collectivist because it has to be described as being a right of the many instead of the one and superior due to that fact. Fascist because ultimately the sole authority for its creation and oversight is from one entity the Federal government. Totalitarian because the Federal government is the enforcer of this collective right as well. State and local jurisdictions will have little say about it.
Congressman Weiner's view is the underlying philosophy of all of the Health Care Reform legislation in the House and Senate. Consider this section in the Senate version of the bill; the setting up of community watch dogs that will monitor citizens for various health parameters. Read pages 382 - 393.
So, even citizens themselves will be subject to Federal regulations on their behavior in order to fulfill the "human right" of universal health care. It isn't the individual's liberty that is being protected by that it is the government's control over its own health care system that is being guarded. How much clearer can it be that these bills abrogate the concept of individual rights? Someone will be checking your lifestyle, according to gov regulations, to be certain you serve the best interests of the "basic human right to health care" ie. "the Public Option."
HCR is not just about rationing care and wealth redistribution. It's about the end of individual rights as the corrosive effects of the new collectivist "basic human right to health care" spreads throughout the legal and political systems like a virus.
I think that the main purpose of Health Care Reform (HCR) is as a direct assault on individual liberties.
Health Care is a Liberty Issue
Conservative Underground - 18 August 2009 - Tim Dunkin
Second Bill of Rights aka FDR's economic bill of rights
(An early attempt to embed collective rights into American politics and society.)
That would give the “Blue Screen of Death” an ENTIRELY new meaning. . .
Re: “That question will be politically incorrect”
Only if you ask someone who is not white.
In which case, it will be grounds for a lawsuit!
At that point surgeons will began injuring their hands in cooking fires or other home accidents. Other medical practitioners will fall from ladders and receive debilitating head injuries.
Heavily subsidized sure... with a debt that can’t even be bankrupted away. What gave that nut any better right than the doc. And as for everyone being satisfied making less money, bet if that nut is in a union the nut isn’t going along with that.
how about going there and telling them they are complete dicks then.
Please do it quickly and hide your tracks. I fear they may soon come after you for abjuring your so-called "obligation to the public welfare."
Anyhow, there may be more business for concierge docs who, so far, are still outside the Bummercare system. Have you thought of that?
This concerns me the most, as I will be a sexagenarian in a few months. By the time I have a major health crisis, the bureaucrats will be ready to yank the plug.
Woo = soon. Was posting from my iPhone and must have run into auto correct. I am a hospitalist not primary care, so concierge is not an option. However I look for the govt to outlaw concierge practices soon anyway.
Let them come. I am not going to hide in what is still (for now) a free country. When it is required I will proudly stand for freedom and for Christ no matter what the consequences.
Ah, the market will look for a way. Maybe hospitals and clinics in Canada and Mexico, geared strictly to foreigners: Visa, Amex, Master Card, or cash.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.