Universal Health Care

[ReformedDave]

Great posts OP!!!!!! He confuses 'grace' with 'justice'.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

Great posts OP!!!!!! He confuses 'grace' with 'justice'.

Dave, you confuse Truth with Fiction!
You don't live in Canada, you don't know how the system works.

If you equate stealing with helping a fellow human being get health care, than you can not support someone who doesn't have enough to eat.
Your taxes do that, it also helps to protect the just A& the unjust through the same system.

That's right-rains on the just & unjust, blessings befall the just & the unjust.


I am just thankful to God that the majority of Americans are waking up!

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Ron

Dave, you confuse Truth with Fiction!
You don't live in Canada, you don't know how the system works.

If you equate stealing with helping a fellow human being get health care, than you can not support someone who doesn't have enough to eat.
Your taxes do that, it also helps to protect the just A& the unjust through the same system.

That's right-rains on the just & unjust, blessings befall the just & the unjust.


I am just thankful to God that the majority of Americans are waking up!

My statement is not specifically about Canada. It's mainly about the USA. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that I take money from my family's income to give to someone else. I have no say in the matter. That is stealing. Whether it is from a gun or government it is the same.

I am all for benevolent giving and my church and I do what we can. But to take it from me under force is sin.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

My statement is not specifically about Canada. It's mainly about the USA. Nobody has a 'right' to demand that I take money from my family's income to give to someone else. I have no say in the matter. That is stealing. Whether it is from a gun or government it is the same.

I am all for benevolent giving and my church and I do what we can. But to take it from me under force is sin.

Maybe you need to revisit the scripture about "cheerful giving" God likes someone like that.

Even before I became a Christian that it was the right thing to do to have someone have access to basic medical care.

[ReformedDave]

Originally Posted by Ron

Maybe you need to revisit the scripture about "cheerful giving" God likes someone like that.

Even before I became a Christian that it was the right thing to do to have someone have access to basic medical care.

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

[OP_Carl]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

Socialism has a mighty powerful siren's song for a sales pitch. The really fun part is when less than 50% of the population fund the system, and more than 50% are on the dole. That is known as "the tipping point," and the only recovery is via revolution or collapse. Even pure democracy has its perils. That's why America was founded to be a constitutional republic - NOT a democracy. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for supper. Liberty is an armed sheep contesting the vote.

The founding fathers knew that pure democracy was inherently unstable, and that is why the original system only allowed landowners to vote. The price of participation was demonstration that you had a stake in the success of the system, and that you had at least a modicum of life skill competence.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by ReformedDave

You have a hard time with reading what I just wrote. Mighty cold up there eh?

I said that I'm all for benevolent giving. Just recently our church paid for a member's operation. I believe in it!

When one uses the term 'right' it means someone HAS to provide that right. I do not see in scripture where government has the authority to steal from me to give to you.....

"Cheerful giving"? You bet. Not forced but gracefully.

And Bro you ain't hearing me!
I am against Taxation-period.

That being said, if they are going to tax us, why not put it to good use.
We pay for police protection, fire protection, education, defense, etc;

Making sure that everyone has food, clothing, shelter, & medical care & an affordable price.

If you have issue with Health, you should have issue with the rest of your Taxes!

I am saying we should make sure that there is no lack for food, housing, or medical care, at least in North America.
Do you have a problem with that?

[Ron]

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

Socialism has a mighty powerful siren's song for a sales pitch. The really fun part is when less than 50% of the population fund the system, and more than 50% are on the dole. That is known as "the tipping point," and the only recovery is via revolution or collapse. Even pure democracy has its perils. That's why America was founded to be a constitutional republic - NOT a democracy. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for supper. Liberty is an armed sheep contesting the vote.

The founding fathers knew that pure democracy was inherently unstable, and that is why the original system only allowed landowners to vote. The price of participation was demonstration that you had a stake in the success of the system, and that you had at least a modicum of life skill competence.

The US stopped being a Republic.
It is now an empire-an empire teetering on collaspe!

[OP_Carl]

Originally Posted by Ron

And Bro you ain't hearing me!
I am against Taxation-period.

That being said, if they are going to tax us, why not put it to good use.
We pay for police protection, fire protection, education, defense, etc;

The issue is that we have been tricked into believing that subsidizing the individual needs of some groups of people is an analogous category of public spending as defense and fire protection. It isn't. Social programs are not in the interest of the general public, but in the interest of special interest groups. It is actually a disservice to the groups that it enslaves in a virtually inescapable cycle of dependency.

The bureaucracies that administer the programs quickly become cancerous, making conscious effort to continually expand their budgets, regardless of the true measure of need in their area.

[Ron]

Originally Posted by OP_Carl

The issue is that we have been tricked into believing that subsidizing the individual needs of some groups of people is an analogous category of public spending as defense and fire protection. It isn't. Social programs are not in the interest of the general public, but in the interest of special interest groups. It is actually a disservice to the groups that it enslaves in a virtually inescapable cycle of dependency.

The bureaucracies that administer the programs quickly become cancerous, making conscious effort to continually expand their budgets, regardless of the true measure of need in their area.

It is a terrible thing when people need health care!
Cancer, Heart Disease, not my problem!

It is clear to see who would walk to the other side of the road when the man taken among thieves was in need of a good Samaritan!