BS. Don't try to twist the debate. If you think I'm getting rich off medicaid/medicare, you don't know anything about medicine. (I don't even accept new medicaid patients, but I treat many patients for the local Free Clinic - for free.) And I'd walk away from medical practice in a heartbeat if I were in any way pressured to cooperate in euthanasia (which is highly unlikely, since I'm just a Podiatrist.)
This IS about medical ethics, and whether we as a culture are going to force people into accepting euthanasia, plain and simple.
So again, the question remains, which budget items are more important to you than health care for those who need it? Would you ration care in order to subsidize welfare checks? Planned Parenthood? A new aircraft carrier or nuclear sub?
1.) you are the socialist(s) here, not me. You want to take other people's money and use it to fund socialist enterprises. If you can't get the money through taxes, you seem perfectly willing to borrow or print more money even though that is destroying the country. You try to cloak your arguments with conservative wrapping paper, but it's still a box full of socialism inside. So, that makes y'all the socialists in this argument. I am the conservative here, not you
2.) you ignore the $1.6 trillion budget deficit and how we came to it. Your attempt to make that about aircraft carriers and subs or welfare checks or planned parenthood or euthanasia, or christian ethics is a non-sequitur, nobody here is arguing for more of any of these things.
3.) and, once again, you are the one(s) arguing for government rationed/controlled healthcare here, not me. It's the gravy train and, as I have already stated, the 1.6 trillion dollar budget deficit is going to apply the brakes to that train whether you like it or not. That's what happens when people put social agendas ahead of fiscal responsibility. Don't get mad at me though, I put fiscal responsibility way ahead of any social agendas. I am not, in any way, responsible for our financial dilemma.