Posted on 02/20/2010 12:38:33 PM PST by wagglebee
I seem to be invoking George Carlin more and more in my old age. As foul-mouthed as he was, Carlin had some interesting perceptions on how ours is a society filled with unfathomable absurdity. He definitely hit the ball out of the park when he talked about the stereotypical American’s sense of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) in matters of public and social policy.
As if to underscore this in particular, Carlin pointed to the need for more prisons in the United States as a sterling example of the NIMBY phenomenon. “We need more prisons. More prisons now! Build more prisons! But, don’t do it here.”
Arguing that a prison in your neighborhood might actually make it a safer community (no one busts out of prison and hangs around to check real estate trends), Carlin did a predictably apt job at pointing out how our own hypocrisies reveal that we don’t always think an issue all the way through.
We’re all guilty and, wanting others to do what we want them to do (not necessarily what is right), seems like a human condition we all suffer from on occasion. These things tend to trouble me, however, when they appear to be the result of parroting the talking points of the day instead of actually thinking a problem all the way through.
Take the current public disparity over health care reform. Groan all you wish, but the issue, the debating and the arm-chair punditry are not going away. I have friends, family and co-workers who are taking this situation very seriously (correctly so) and who fall squarely on either one side of the debate or the other. But, I’ve noticed something rather strange in all of this and it has me wondering if some people actually believe the things that come out of their own mouths.
In recent months, I’ve heard quite a bit from people who believe that health care should be considered a right – not a privilege. That no one should be denied care because of their income or station in life. Quite frankly, I couldn’t agree more. Whether or not I think our representatives are tackling the problem in the proper or most expedient fashion is a discussion for another time. Mind you, in a country where we espouse a right to life and our laws ensure that very same right, I think the right to fight for your life can — and should — be as aggressively defended.
The oddity is that so many of the people I’ve spoken with who think health care should be treated as a right are many of the same people who tell me that removing certain types of care from profoundly disabled, chronically ill or elderly people is perfectly appropriate. After all, people should have a right to die. Shouldn’t they?
Well, let’s talk about that for a moment. If we are to embrace the collective notion that all people have a right to see a doctor – irrespective of their income, ethnicity or other social factors – why, then would we consider denying care to people with disabilities, advanced age or complicated medical conditions an acceptable practice?
There are plenty of people who would argue that living life with a profound disability (or other challenging circumstance) is simply not worth it. But, by whose gauge? Yours? Mine?
The problem with the right to die lobby is that they’re damn good at what they do. In the past 30 or so years, they’ve managed to impact legislation that allows states within our union (and countries afar) to permit the practices of assisted suicide, voluntary euthanasia, palliative sedation and involuntary euthanasia. More often than not, these aggressive actions are taken against those who are unable to defend themselves. Not unwilling to defend themselves. Unable.
The right to die lobby has also engaged in a particularly fastidious public relations campaign that has managed to convince many of us with a shred of compassion that it’s kinder to hasten or cause death than it is to provide appropriate intervention, palliation, restorative therapies or even the random act of kindness.
To be certain, the right to die lobby has little (if any) interest in human suffering, acts of compassion or even the well-being of patients in need. Theirs is a lobbying effort which, in my estimation, speaks entirely to the cost of care and the burden they perceive other people to be.
In less than two weeks, I’ve read of a Russian journalist calling disabled newborns “it” instead of he or she, an American commentator asking that we be reasonable about “care rationing” and the ever-bubbly Ludwig Minelli (founder of Dignitas) calling for those who are simply “tired of living” to be helped to die.
Not a single shred of human decency amongst any of them.
This really isn’t doing anyone any favors. It’s dismissing the needs of certain people in favor of doing what is either financially expedient or that which doesn’t challenge us as neighbors. Either way, it’s not intellectually honest.
Let me ask you a question. Are these really the people you want guiding the climate of health care when it comes to your own survival?
Ask any registered nurse in a critical care environment, or a volunteer at a legitimate Hospice facility and they will quickly tell you the sum worth of their job, their efforts and their diligence. It’s caring. Simple as it gets.
The matter gets particularly muddied and protracted when advocates pit one side against the other through the cunning use of politics. Thus far, the right to die lobby has done an exceptional job making their talking points attractive to those left of center and far left of center. But, don’t buy the hype.
Liberal world views have always embraced tolerance, volunteerism and inclusion as deep-seated values. Why change now?
The truth may be that we’ve all been lead astray in this debate. Certainly, if any one person has the right to fight for their life, than everyone does. This includes the people you may not think of as potent or particularly impactful. In the end, it shouldn’t matter what you think.
Promoting a right to die or a right to euthanize others is, in and of itself, absolute abandonment of human beings with needs.
And, what could possibly make a stronger case for the theory of NIMBY phenomenon? “Health care for everyone! But, not that guy.”
Well, what if that guy is you?
Pamela F. Hennessy
Pamela Hennessy volunteered as the media spokesperson and web producer for the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation from November 2002 until March 2006.
Exactly!
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Ping!
Then there is what Carlin meant.
You want to incarcerate 2/3 of your neighbors? Build the prison (literally) in your back yard - with your own money.
Want a good job? Well - don’t whine when a business blocks your view or alters traffic patterns on your street.
ATTENTION FELLOW TEXANS:
Governor Rick Perry may invoke the 10th Amendment over
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2299225/posts?q=1&;page=51
.
Get after Perry, Texans. Burn up his switch board and fax!
Let him know we don’t want Obama DeathCare.
Say no to Obama’s DeathCare.
Send a message; DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS healthcare!
No! NO you don’t, you muzzie pos.
You’re not denying our seniors deserved health care while insuring millions of illegal aliens and while Demorats are REJECTING Obamacare for themselves and their families!
.
.
.
Join organizations who fight ObamaCare.
This is a good organization:
The Alliance of Texans Against Government Controlled Healthcare:
http://www.notintexas.org/
office (972) 466-2915
fax (972) 466-2965
toll-free (866) 377-1300
From the website:
We are currently contacting Governor Rick Perry by fax and mail!
We have made it easy for you to help. Click here to display the letter and contact information.
http://www.notintexas.org/Letter_rick_perry.htm
Petition to STOP government controlled healthcare in Texas
Read and sign the petition
http://www.notintexas.org/Letter_to_Reps.htm
.
Print and sign the letter
(feel free to make changes if you wish)
Fax the letter to the fax numbers
Mail a hard copy to the addresses
Call their offices
Dear Governor Perry,
On March 30, 2009 the Texas House of Representatives passed HCR 50 affirming that the State of Texas claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment.
You have publicly supported this bill, and stated that attorney generals from all over the union could be getting ready to sue the US Government.
We are asking you to take the lead.
We are asking you to order the Texas Attorney General to publicly begin working on a law suit under Article IV, Ninth, and Tenth Amendment of the Constitution.
We are asking you to protect the citizens of Texas that we will not stand for government controlled healthcare in our state.
Under your leadership we can effectively kill the proposal of this administration and allow Texas to be a state free from socialism and collectivism.
Be the voice of reason in the national debate and allow Texans the ability to solve the problems of our state.
Thank you,
(Signature Date)
.
Lookup your state representatives
FREE FAX SERVICSES:
http://www.gotfreefax.com/
http://faxzero.com/
or google ‘free fax’
Contacting Rick Perry
Office of the Governor
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711
Phone: (512) 463-2000
Fax: (512) 463-1849
Washington Office:
122 C St., NW, Ste. 200
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 638-3927
Fax: (202) 628-1943
Contact Budget Planning and Policy
Address:1100 San Jacinto
Austin, Texas 78701
Phone: (512) 463-1778
Fax: (512) 463-1975
Gregory S. Davidson
Constituent Communication Division Director and
Executive Clerk to the Governor
Phone: (512) 463-1873
Office of the General Counsel
Department Mailing Address
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, TX 78711
Phone: 512.463.2000
Fax: 512.463.1932
Press Secretary
Allison Castle, Press Secretary
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711
Phone: (512) 463-1826
Fax: (512) 463-1847
Contact Texas Health Care Policy Council
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711
Phone: (512) 463-1778
Fax: (512) 463-1975
Sign up. Become a member.
Sign petition against Obamacare!
See member interview with Cavuto!
____________________
From Texans Against Government Controlled Health Care
Facts about the 10th Amendment:
The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. The Tenth Amendment restates the Constitution’s principle of Federalism by providing that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states or the people.
HCR 50 HAS PASSED THE HOUSE 99-36!
HCR 50 HAS PASSED THE HOUSE 99-36!
Affirming that the State of Texas claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution, serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates, and providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed.
Take Action! Before it is too late!
.
.
.
__________________________
REMEMBER THIS,TEXANS:
Feds Have Built Only 32 Miles of 700 Mile Double-Border Fence Originally Mandated by Congress
“One reason DHS has been able to do this is an amendment that Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R.-Texas) slipped into an omnibus appropriations bill that Congress passed on December 18, 2007. Hutchison’s amendment put a loophole in the fence law that allowed the secretary of Homeland Security not to build the fence Congress had mandated the year before.”
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/43422
I'm sorry Ms Hennessy. I've read the constitution and the bill of rights; I can't find one passage that defines a God given right to medical care. Maybe that's because the founders placed certain expectations on churches and society at large.
Even if you can twist "the right to life" into "the right to government subsidized medical care," I will deflate that argument.
The second amendment defines the right to keep and bear arms. Let's put this right into Ms Hennessy's on terms.
I’ve heard quite a bit from people who believe that gun ownership should be considered a right – not a privilege. That no one should be denied guns because of their income or station in life. Quite frankly, I couldn’t agree more.
If the "right" to healthcare means the government must provide it, then the clearly described right to arms should also be subsidized.
I believe she means that ideally nobody would be denied health care for any reason. I do not believe she means that everyone should be provided with government-supplied medical care. The reality is that Americans are not denied basic medical care because they are not able to pay for it.
S’truth!
;-)
Of course, if you can figure out a way to subsidize guns, I’ve always wanted a Holland & Holland O/U shotgun, but my wife won’t let me spend the money.
http://www.hollandandholland.com/~newyork/newguns/index.htm
I hope that's not the only item on your list!
Nah, I’ve got plenty of other guns, but my wife always seems to put her foot down when I tell her I’m thinking about buying a shotgun that costs $100K.
Tell her it’s on sale so you’re saving money.
I’ve tried that! I’ve even suggested that there’s a significant savings for buying a pair.
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.