Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 11/26/2007 7:10:29 AM PST by Invisigoth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Invisigoth

We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Everything after that is what WE make of it. Period.


2 posted on 11/26/2007 7:18:45 AM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

What about my right to quality of life issues in my old age (67)?

I think I’m entitled to a couple of 20 year olds to keep my old bones warm at night and my outlook bright.


3 posted on 11/26/2007 7:19:03 AM PST by wildbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

If there is a “right” to goods and services, Hillary, why aren’t there any Wal-Marts in NYC? Riddle me that one, huh?


4 posted on 11/26/2007 7:20:51 AM PST by CholeraJoe (Gimme 'nother slice of that Cajun-fried turkey, gimme 'nother piece of that pecan pie.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth
Over the passage of time, a "right" to health care has to result dimished quality as prices will have to be held down as demand for free services is infinite. Prices are reimbursements to service providers. They can either settle for lower incomes or longer work hours.

As conditions diminish for health care workers, fewer highly qualified people will elect to enter a government controlled workforce. Longer hours and deployments to fringe areas will compel ever more people to avoid health care employment. Until one day, nobody want to become a doctor.

And then, what of the peoples' right to health care? Will the government have to start selecting youngsters with the capacity to learn medicine and track them into lifetime servitude as government physicians? I don't see how thay can avoid it.

5 posted on 11/26/2007 7:20:57 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

Sorry, FDR made slaves of your folks and all who came after way back in the 1930s.

Hillary’s job will be to put locks on our shackles.


9 posted on 11/26/2007 7:25:26 AM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

One of the worst problems is government housing is it the
breading ground for every vice!
The few people who are truely needy, their needs would be met
by local charity and not by federal or state government.

Bring back the local poor house for the truely needy.


10 posted on 11/26/2007 7:29:01 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (Rudy and Romney voters send a self-abused stomped elephant to the DRNC.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

We have a right to an affordable higher education. College professors should accept lower wages and be transferred to where most of their students are.

Or, we have a right to affordable news. “Journalists” should submit to a fixed pay scale.

Better, we have a right to affordable government. Politician salaries should be limited to the median income of their constituents, with no additional income streams allowed for the duration of their term in office.

Lets put all of the above three “rights” into place before we start monkeying around with the “right” to affordable healthcare.


12 posted on 11/26/2007 7:35:52 AM PST by chrisser (Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference between “conservation” and the neutron bomb.”- Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth
There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own money -- if a gun is held to his head." -- P.J. O'Rourke

"Freedom is not empowerment. Empowerment is what the Serbs have in Bosnia. Anybody can grab a gun and be empowered. It's not entitlement. An entitlement is what people on welfare get, and how free are they? It's not an endlessly expanding list of rights - the "right" to education, the "right" to health care, the "right" to food and housing. That's not freedom, that's dependency. Those aren't rights, those are the rations of slavery - hay and a barn for human cattle." -- P.J. O'Rourke

16 posted on 11/26/2007 8:04:00 AM PST by mc5cents (Show me just what Mohammd brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth
The trouble is that rights have become special privileges. Money taken by force from others and given to others (with the thief politician and poverty pimps keeping most). Special rights in hiring one group over another; the list goes on and on.
19 posted on 11/26/2007 8:56:25 AM PST by samm1148 (Pennsylvania-They haven't taxed air--yet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

George Will has deemed them “freshly minted rights” (of course he means they aren’t rights at all).

However, I plan on marching on Washington in order to exercise my rights and receive a Mercedes, plasma TV and new house.


20 posted on 11/26/2007 8:58:10 AM PST by relictele
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth
The next constitutional ammendment says,

"No person or entity has as a right to any material good or service produced by another and as such, the government and all people and entities acting on behalf of the government are prohibited from compelling one to give up his assets, goods or services for the benefit of another."

22 posted on 11/26/2007 9:02:47 AM PST by SwankyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

We are already there. As things stand now, anyone who shows up in a hospital emergency department, MUST receive care, regardless of ability to pay. As a condition of my appointment to the medical staff, I am required to provide coverage to the ED. I am compelled to provide my services, regardless of whether I ever get paid. For the “privilege” of having done so, I am fully exposed to any lawsuit they can convince a lawyer to pursue.

As a society, we may decide it is unAmerican to let someone die in the ED just because they can’t pay. But, if we as a society are going to impose that mandate, let that same society pick up the tab.


25 posted on 11/26/2007 9:44:18 AM PST by RedElement
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth

There is NO right to food, shelter or medical care that you can’t pay for. The only “right” any of us have, that others are bound to pay for, is to legal representation in a court of law.

Nationalize the Laywers!


26 posted on 11/26/2007 9:44:57 AM PST by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Invisigoth; raygun

“But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.”

“Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.”

“The person who profits from this law will complain bitterly, defending his acquired rights. He will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry; that this procedure enriches the state because the protected industry is thus able to spend more and to pay higher wages to the poor workingmen.”

“Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it.”

from “How To Identify Legal Plunder”...(much more) here...

http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html#SECTION_G1434

Thanks to FReeper raygun for the link.


29 posted on 11/26/2007 10:34:57 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson