Tuesday, September 08, 2009

Here Goes Everything

14 comments:

Derek said...

Thanks for posting - moving and urgent. Already affects so many people I know here. 'Health Care is a Human Right'. Indeed. I do despair a wee bit about whether or not there will be a public option. But I have hope for the long term.

Blessings...

Annabanana said...

I hope the public option survives. I also hope there's more room for growth in who decides what is "medically necessary." From the details I've been able to find, much of our sons' procedures would qualify as "unnecessary procedures" under current parameters. I don't want to be afraid, I just hope everyone keeps talking and participating-for the sake of people (wish I could phrase that better) and growing the dream.

mjaneb said...

phrased very well, annabanana.

Greetings from Bulgaria said...

Our current healthcare system leaves a lot to be desired. There seem to be so many stories involving people who have lost their health insurance for really illogical reasons. The insurance sector seems to need some reform as well. I certainly believe in caring for my neighbors, but that is not from a government mandate. When did healthcare become a human right that the government is required to provide? Just a question...

jdaviddark said...

Glad to hear from you, Sofia.
"When did healthcare become a human right that the government is required to provide?"
I suppose this happens when taxpayers decide they want the funds they contribute to the public coffer to go toward basic healthcare for all (as its already been generally decided that some form of education for citizens up through high school, military forces, libraries, etc. are a worthwhile draw upon our resources) and take this decision to the ballot box. A human right, as I see it, is a right some humans decide to accord to their fellow humans. And, in some cases, the language of divinely ordained obligations is invoked.

Greetings from Bulgaria said...

I appreciate the definition for human rights- it is simple and clear. I guess my question is why is the expectation for the government to manage this program, considering that it often contributes to several of those programs mentioned becoming more inefficient and bureaucratic. Is there room in our culture for citizens to bare this obligation? What would that look like? Are we really in community with one another when we pass this responsibility on to the government rather than engage in one another's lives on a personal level? Or is that too messy? I know the relationship between government programs and citizen action is not mutually exclusive, but my concern is looking to government (which will never be perfect) to meet all our needs. Also, is there a good website on-line to find more info about public option? Thanks for your response.

James Layne said...

:)

James Layne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
James Layne said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Publican_Chest said...

Wow, great points sophia. Heartily agree. We tend to run to the government to bail us out instead of running to one another in community.

Anonymous said...

word up sophia. i understand your distrust of govt. after the last few presidents i have a rather dim view of it myself. but imo govt's role ought to be to protect the simple, hardworking people from the tyranny and folly of those who would act recklessly and selfishly and destabilize our society for their own gain (ie, criminals, some corporations, the ultra rich, and those who desire to become ultra rich). an imperfect attempt to do so (ie obama, maybe) would be much better than no attempt at all (ie reagan, h.w., clinton, w). to me overhauling the health care and health insurance industries falls into this category of protecting the citizenry from tyranny and folly. exactly what should be done about the problem is rightly up for debate but i would argue it is the govt's role to lead this reform, this overhaul.....who else can?

Mike Row said...

I'm in the process of reading your book on questioning and thank you for having made me think.

As I watch this video, my feeble mind can't help but ask: "What of the Divine Mandate of the Church to care for the poor, the orphaned and the widowed?"

Historically, it seems to me that, as government is increasingly looked upon as the sustain-er of every human need in the U.S., God seems to fade from our thoughts.

Giving government increasing control over every aspect of our everyday lives, also opens the door for potential totalitarianism. Example: President Obama may be a very nice person who won't abuse federal power but what about future Presidents? Will they be as nice?

Lastly, Utopian dreams - whether they come in the form of "The War on Poverty" or "The War on Drugs" always have negative unintended consequences. While the various outcomes of the previously mentioned "Wars" speak for themselves, what happens if a "Public Option" for health care has vastly worse outcomes than originally anticipated? You can't put the genie back in the bottle once the government takes control.

That is why I ask: Shouldn't the members of the Body of Christ act to care for the poor, the orphaned and the widowed instead of placing such people on YouTube?

I just started a blog, "Views from Fly-Over Country," and would be honored to receive your comments regarding its content.

angus said...

the body of christ has had a couple thousand years worldwide (and a couple hundred in this country) to step up and take care of the poor. it is perfectly clear that the church is either incapable of handling the task or, more disturbingly, unwilling to sacrifice things like the glorified vacations that are short term missions in order to make it happen. hell, most churches in this country don't like the poor or needy. why else would they remove themselves completely from the fabric of their cities and set up shop in the suburbs? i'm sick of the argument that the church should do it. based upon that logic it stands to reason that if the church doesn't do it, it shouldn't be done.
if government providing/offsetting the material needs of the poor in this country really causes god to fade from one's thoughts; then one might want to question their relationship with god as it stands now. it's a sad day indeed when the body of christ has ignored people's needs for so long that they feel youtube is the best hope for drumming up compassion.

Fiona said...

Great video, thanks so much for posting it. Sometimes it's hard to see the benefits of such schemes as these when they're merely abstract. I'm from Australia where universal public healthcare is a given, and I can say that if it weren't for public healthcare, my little brother would most likely be dead now, or at least on constant dialysis. He was treated in a specialist public children's hospital by wonderful doctors, that we would not have been able to afford had there been no provision for public healthcare. Just a bit of perspective from the other side of the fence.