Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 12:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Aside from the moral imperative, economics demands covering everyone."
--
What religion is this "moral imperative" founded in? I know of no religion that calls for governments to force the taking of personal property from those that have earned it through legitimate means, and give it to those that don't. Any lawmaker that votes on this health care plan based on morals is violating the separation of church and state. As a Christian, I have been taught not to covet what my neighbor has (like their money or health care). I am also taught to tithe and pay taxes. A person tithes and gives gifts because they want to. Taxes are paid by people whether they want to or not. If socialized medicine is really a "moral imperative," then talk to your pastor at your church about funding it, or start a charity for that purpose. I'm sure that the morals of individual citizens are much greater than those that "serve us" in Washington D.C., and I don't need politicians trying to save my soul by spending my tax dollars on health plans that used to be found only in the governments of our enemies. As long as there are Americans that pay taxes and disagree with socialized medicine, it will never be "moral" to fund it with tax revenue.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 12:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And another thing. If the goal is to really help those that need it, how does entrusting the task to politicians that keep illegal funds in their freezer or run homosexual prostitution rings from their Washington D.C. apartments make any sense?

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 2:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

OldSchoolPike3Worker, you're a complete idiot. Morality is not exclusive to religion. Using your failed logic any crime committed against an individual or against property could be considered immoral and would be a violation of separation of church and state. Let see, murder is a crime, murder is immoral, murder is a sin in the Bible; uh oh, laws against murder must be a violation of separation of church and state. See how your argument is a bunch of junk.

Anyway, if you don't want to pay taxes then don't. Enjoy prison.

Posted by inaword (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The problem I have with all of the proposed bills is that congress and the senate will not be subjected to the same rules. Sounds to me like "Do as I say, Don't do as I do".

Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

All of these so-called Christians. that spew a few verses from memory out the bible, but always seem to forget or acknowledge that their Lord & Savior Jesus Christ taught liberalism.

Old Testament (conservative)

New Testament (Christian)(liberal)

Posted by Blue_Sky (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is a reform of health insurance and not that everyone will get health care - unless they go to the emergency room like they are already doing. Make health insurance more affordable and available and maybe less will depend on the emergency room for less than emergency treatment.

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 24, 2009 at 6:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I support a public option, however an alternative that I think would work well to lower the cost of insurance would be to adopt Switzerland's model. In Switzerland health insurance is privatized, however insurance companies must offer a general insurance package in which they cannot make a profit from. Insurance companies can however offer supplemental insurance for profit. The government also subsidizes insurance for low income individuals and set costs for procedures and medicine and perform audits on doctor's whose claims are a certain limit over the median to control corruption. There, individuals can go to any doctor they wish and choose from any provider they wish. There is little wait time for care and doctors make about $100,000/year with some specialists making up to $300,000.

Also, I feel there should be drastic changes in tort reform for medical malpractice suits either way.

In Switzerland the average cost for insurance per individual is about $4,000 a year compared to about $7500 in the US per individual.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't you know that there is a difference between a tithe and a tax?

Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the spelling...

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 9:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

FoX, how much is a one way plane ticket to Switzerland? I will pay for it if you promise to stay.

Posted by Linden (anonymous) on October 26, 2009 at 11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This article has now flow to it....Nor any sense!

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 4:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

First Class Sun, Jan 03, 2010 from Atlanta to Zurich w/ stop in Paris on United Airlines : $9889.10.

Only two seats are available so please book as soon as possible OldSchoolPike3Worker.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Typical liberal, you want me to pitch-in on your health care AND fly you first class.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

FoX, if morality is not exclusive to religion, then where did it originate? Are you saying that the idea of stealing another person's property being wrong is just a random development in society? Did it ever occur to you that since the dawn of recorded history man has based morality on the wills of a higher power? We don't even have to go back that far. The U.S. Constitution is based on Judea-Christian beliefs and the concept of our creator granting us rights that no government or person should be able to take away. That is my problem with programs such as socialized medicine. The concept of taking property from someone that has earned it. (i.e money) and using it to pay for health insurance for another that has not earned, or maybe even has enough money to buy their own insurance but just chooses not to, is in stark contrast to the purpose of this country's founding. These arguments have been hashed out decades ago. History has shown us the folly in wealth redistribution. What makes you think that it will work now?

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, don't criticize me when you're the one who said you would pay for the ticket. I'm sure if you're in the tax bracket that is to be taxed to pay for healthcare then you can easily afford $10,000 (Yeah, I forgot taxes and fees).

As for your morality comment, if you believe that religion is the only source of morality, then are agnostics and atheists immoral? I think altruism is part of human nature. People don't need guidance from a God to know that killing or stealing another human is wrong. This same type of nature can be seen throughout the animal kingdom.

However, just say Judea-Christianity is correct, and the Judea-Christian God is the only true god, then how is it these other false religions developed the same fundamental laws within their respective religions? Murder, rape, theft, and lying are pretty much universally condemned. Obviously, if Judea-Christians are correct then these aren't receiving any guidance from God.

Even when subjected to religion, a lot of people still commit crimes and in the past, the Church has actually been a catalyst for some of the worst atrocities in history. Remember the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition? Also, the Bible actually promotes the murder and punishment of heretics. I suppose you've never read Leviticus, or do you think that stoning sorcerers is the right thing to do morally?

This brings me to the point of morality being subjective. To you, it appears that taxing Americans so that other Americans can receive medical care is morally reprehensible, however I believe it it is immoral to deny people medical care who need it. As I recall, Life is one of the inalienable rights. If you think morality is cut and dry, then when is murder okay? Is it okay to kill someone because your country is at war with their country? Is execution moral? Do you lie to protect a person or tell truth and cause harm to that person?

Finally, as for this country being founded on Judea-Christian beliefs, can you show me one law in the US that is exclusive to Judea-Christian ideology or one mention of Yahweh or Jesus in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States? Many of the founding fathers were Deists, which has much more in common with Agnosticism than Christianity. In the Declaration, there is reference to the natural God, but not the Christian God and in Deism, God is thought of as a natural God. Go figure.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You are a lost cause my friend. I don't know who I should pity more, you or those that you mange to persuade.

Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There doesn't have to be a law that is exclusive to Judea-Christian ideology because all of our laws are based in it. At least the Constitution through the Bill of Rights. Either way, whatever you think about morality, how can you entrust the current culture in Washington with health care? Why is that a better alternative? And, how do the cost outweigh any possible benefits? Every program they run ends up costing unimaginable amounts more than projected at the start.

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 6:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How can you claim our government was founded on a Judea-Christian ideology when you can't show me one mention of Yahweh, Jesus within our government or a law based on a principle that is exclusive to Christianity? You're not supporting your argument very well.

Secondly, the Bill of Rights is part of the Constitution. How can you be so preachy about what our government should be when you don't even know something basic as that? Again, you're showing your lack of knowledge for U.S. history.

Finally, how can you be fine with our health care system that is about twice as expensive per person than any other country in the world and whose quality is ranked below about 30 other countries. You're fooling yourself if you think the US health care system is the best in the world. Oh, and there is the issue with 47 million people in the US being uninsured, either do to the high costs or the fact they can't be insured due to preexisting conditions.

Insurance companies No. 1 objective is to make money. When it comes to the health of Americans, I think availability and quality should take priority of profitability. That is why I think a government option that is non-profit is needed.

But Yay for capitalism right.

Posted by Blue_Sky (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 7:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Fox, you are cool - don't let them get to you.

Posted by FoX (anonymous) on October 27, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

* priority over profitability.

Posted by mythoughts (anonymous) on October 30, 2009 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well sorry folks I am all for health care reform.. I work and am thankful I have a job.. I work 6 days a week and I have no heath care benefits from my job... nor do I have the money to buy it either ... nor do I qualify for any public assistance... So because I choose to go to work to try and have something rather than be on welfare I have to worry about how to pay for a doctor everytime I get sick... you have no idea how many times I have broke down and scawled because I have been so sick I could not stand myself and had no money to get help... and worried what would happen to my kids if I died... while the ones of you who are blessed to have health insurance I am glad that you do (really I am) ... but before you complain about others try to imagine if it were you that was in desperite need of medical assistance and your only option is to go to an emergancy room where they do not want to look at you because you are not fortunate enough to have medical benefits!!!! .... I do everything I can to try not to get sick but you know sometimes life doesn't give you a choice...

Posted by zblogan (anonymous) on November 3, 2009 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's astounding listening to someone advocate public option health insurance because of their financial situation while they post from a $$ computer $$ over the $ internet $. It is difficult for me to sympathize with someone who is not more frugal with their resources.

Posted by DavidKern (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 8:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mike Rogers: Recent press release "Speaker Pelosi's health care bill" raise some questions that deserve some additional consideration.

I was encouraged by his demonstrable improvement in tone, although he can’t seem to quite break away from “market tested” phrases e.g. “massive reform”, and “Speaker Pelosi’s $1 trillion health care bill”, obviously the Speaker’s public negatives are extremely high, therefore, emotionally conflating the bill into a referendum of her personally, is a powerful marketing tactic.

I have responded by detailing 7 points which are in the comment section of the Jacksonville news online at: http://www.jaxnews.com/pages/full_story/...

David Kern

Posted by 1996tahoe (anonymous) on November 19, 2009 at 4:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I know we need some sort of health care reform, but I know I do not like the idea of the government running it. Our Gov. has a pitiful track record when it comes to managing any type of program. Sometimes I think it would be better to have more state goverenment than federal, let the states take care of their own. Anyway, I do feel bad for "AMERICANS" that do not have insurance, especially if they have children. Oh yeah...Fox your a freakin moron, hope you don't hold a political position, it's obvious you have no idea what your talking about.

Posted by ark (anonymous) on November 20, 2009 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Stop smoking, drinking and wasting your money on junk and things that you don't need. Food, clothing and shelter is all you need.