Right to Healtcare and RKBA

[MarkD]

Lots of folks have weighed in on Obama's "right to healthcare", but bear with me while I explore this using our beloved Second Amendment as a guide.

We all agree that as Americans we have the right to keep and bear arms, meaning we have the right to purchase, own, keep and use weapons for lawful purposes unless there's a good reason (like a felony conviction) why we should be prohibited from exercising that right. I have the right to choose, in consultation with people who know more about weapons than I do, what type of weapon will meet my needs. The government can't (theoretically) tell me that a particular weapon isn't appropriate for me to own.

Nowhere does the Constitution say that we must be provided with weapons at taxpayer expense.

Likewise, if I have a disease I have the right to choose, in consultation with whatever expert I select, a treatment program that meets my needs. I can follow Tom Cruises example and try to heal myself, I can choose holistic medicine, or modern medicine, or just medical care to provide for my comfort until I succumb to the disease. The government can't tell me (for instance) that I'm too old to be treated for a potentially terminal illness and require me to be euthanized.

I don't have the right to have my medical care provided at taxpayer expense.

I think it's an important parallel.

[tcourtplayer]

The problem lies though with the fact that when people talk about having a "right to health care" they are referring to the right of government sponsored health care. I realize this is a distortion of the term but that is what they mean by it when they say it.

[randy]

Kind of goes along with my observations of the hypocrisy of the ACLU.

If ACLU interpreted, and worked to protect the 2nd Amendment as much as they do the 1st, they would be lobbying and litigating the government to provide all Citizens a M-16 and an M-9 (i.e. same weapons as issued to the Millitary) at taxpayer expense, as well as ranges and ammo.

[mekender]

they are saying that your access to a service provided by someone else is a right... essentally the product of their work is your right... which means that their income (time = money) is seized by the government and given to someone else...

classic redistribution of wealth

as someone with a DR in the family, i can assure you that it would lead to many doctors retiring and many more just giving up... if they can no longer make a livable wage for their service, they will start to provide worse care than before.

[George guy]

There is no such thing as a right which requires other people to give you anything.

Repeat, shout, and apply the Stick, as necessary.

[MarkD]

I agree with what everyone here is saying. I'm just trying to reframe the discussion, drawing parallels with RKBA.

[The Quiet Man]

OK...I'll make it as easy as possible. Follow along this very short journey.....The RIGHT to keep and bear arms is actually a RIGHT. Specifically spelled out in the second amendment of our constitution. There is NO RIGHT to healthcare. Nobody has a RIGHT to healthcare...nobody. I have peeked at the constitution a time or two and have never come across the mention of a RIGHT to healthcare.

So, to sum this all up. There really is a RIGHT to keep and bear arms and our constitution says so. There is, in fact, no Right to healthcare. This notion of a healthcare RIGHT is a fantasy that was made up from whole cloth by liberals to reframe the debate regarding healthcare. One RIGHT is real and the other is not.

How was that???

[Jered]

There is no such thing as a right which requires other people to give you anything.

Repeat, shout, and apply the Stick, as necessary.

There used to be, but it went out with the civil war.

[cu74]

I'm just trying to reframe the discussion, drawing parallels with RKBA.

Why? While re-framing the discussion may be an interesting exercise, how many here are actually interested in said discussion? I don't see health care as much of a gun-related subject....

[arkythehun]

cu74,

This is the politics section and when politicians are talking about redistributing wealth, it goes here.

It is a good parallel.

Quiet Man,

"Yes" we do have a right to health care. Just like we have a right to eat, own a house, and brush our teeth.

"No" we do not have a "right" - or any other ownership concept - to have other people pay for it, even in the form of a government.

Mark,

Unless Spells is reading this, you're preaching to the choir.