Right to Health Care?

I agree completely with your assessment, especially with relation to John Edwards' warped conception of what a right is. We currently live in a rapidly "un-maturing" society that does not want to take responsibility for any of the grown up decisions (health care, education, etc.) and would rather turf these choices to the government. Entitlements like government provided health care, education, and food and housing are not rights, they are rations of slavery: hay and a barn for human cattle. There is one basic human right to do whatever you please so long as it does not cause provable harm to another, and the only duty accept responsibility for one's choices. Health care is included in this category. Great insight.

Ben Franklin would have printed and mailed the first PPO cards. The sleazy lawyer-talk (no offense to attorneys) that John Edwards uses is intended to blur the edges of rights and privileges, in pursuit of his selfish ends.

Education is a privilege that makes sense for the common good, but when the implementation no longer achieves the ends, that system of privilege ought to be restructured to educate only those who wish to be educated, by educators who actually educate, and not preach the gospel according to the DNC sheep herding agenda.

What you say is right, but it is not complete. Things are usually easier to criticize when only one side of the argument is presented. There are still cases where people need medical attention and are not able to afford the monthly premium of health insurance plans or simply pay out-of-pocket. Would not a "right" to health care also include availability?

No. I do not believe that a "right" necessarily means availability. We all have the "right" to go buy a car but not everyone can afford it. We all have the "right" to eat organic foods but we cannot all afford it. If you really want it than you have something to work towards. You have a goal.

People talk of "the people who cannot afford insurance" as if they will not be able to afford it for the rest of their lives. That is not always the case. I cannot afford insurance right now but I am going to school in order to get a good job and I will probably be able to afford it in the future. This is the story of many people.

Health care is "available" to all and it is not based on race, gender, etc. But not all can afford it. Well...what else is new? People have not been able to afford a lot of things for a long time. That is why we work for ourselves and for our family to make progress in our own lives and not sit around waiting for the government to do something.

That is a very good point. However, health care is a little different simple because it deals with our health. Health should not be a commodity that only the rich can afford, like a TV. I suppose I'm free to buy any toy that I want, but it's really unavailable unless I can afford it.

The point of my previous post (and this one, too) is that this issue is a little more complicated than going either completely black or white. I'm all for the free market, even in health care, but we really do need to make some modifications. What about people with preexisting conditions? What about students that get cancer? If it weren't for government, socialist Medicaid, many children would die because of lack of availability of simple, rich-people health care.

All I'm saying is that these issues need to be considered when talking about health care. Right now I can justify the calculated gamble of not having health insurance because I'm young and healthy, but I know people in similar situations as mine that have chronic health problems and are barely scraping by, even with health insurance.

Something does need to change.