40,000 years ago a band of Neanderthals gave a touching burial to a crippled, old member of their group.
From what we know about them, life was short and harsh. Yet, they found it in their hearts to care for an old cripple who was of no use to the group as a whole and give him a decent burial.
Eons later a man and women who was going to soon give birth traveled to Bethlehem. Anyone could plainly see she needed a safe place to have her baby yet nobody had "room at the inn." She ended up having her baby in a stable.
2,000 years later the self proclaimed "Greatest Nation on Earth" has millions of people that still don't believe health care is a right that all our brothers and sisters deserve. They hear the words of the Dickens character Scrooge "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?" And stop watching after that. That said it all for millions of arrogant, faux Christians. No need to hear anymore. Scrooge said it all right there.
The health insurance bill has some good,some bad and some ugly. But just like 2,000 years ago, the wealthy got the rooms. The poor got the shaft.
Some will say it's a start to a better system. It's about time. The system a group of Cavemen had 40,000 years ago sounded a lot more humane than Scroogian views of so many in America today.
36 comments:
Truth,
well written.I couldn't agree more.
I'd read about that neanderthal find,as well as other types of examples throughout history, fossil remains showing one who couldn't have kept up being cared for by the group.
Good contrast with modern day non-neanderthals willing to forsake their own health needs and their families health needs to avoid the horror of possibly paying a portion of the tab for someone less fortunate than themselves.
Truth is truth! Facts are facts. And the ignorant are just stupid.
How "so called" Christians can care more about the unborn than the born is beyond me.
Well, I guess it all comes down to money again. They won't pay for abortions. They won't pay for health care. They won't pay for anyone but themselves. I think they are worshiping the money changers. Talk about getting things backwards!
Jerry Critter - You have a point there.
They hear the words of the Dickens character Scrooge "Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?"
i'd say that they hear these words, myself.
"And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him. And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbor unto him that fell among the thieves?"
which of these men were saying that it wasn't his personal responsibility and imply it was the government's responsibility?
but i speak only for myself on this.
I just have to print it.
Then let them get to dying and deplete the surplus population.
We the people have given through our approval and vote; to our government, the right to act and decide on issues, in our best interests.
The government is the Samaritan of our day. We the people made that decision decades ago.
The fact at that time (and still true today) was that the good efforts of religious groups, fraternal organizations, community groups, and individuals (the places where the poor went for help) could not meet the needs of even a small number of the amount of people in need.
Only the financial communal efforts of all citizens could meet the needs of so many in need.
Americans decided they would be willing to pay for programs to help those in need, and have voted to support and enlarge those programs for over 70 years.
Long enough to be considered an American tradition and an American value.
Supported by a majority of the American people, and both political parties.
Disagree with generations of Americans if you must, but it's not true, to try to define those programs as somehow un-American.
How can those on the right say that our government was founded on Judeo/Christian principles, then say it's not governments job to help the poor and less fortunate? How can they keep a straight face?
Today's neanderthals, pseudo-Christians that they are, in many ways are more primitive than the original types. The original neanderthals laid the groundwork for open-minded discovery and science and technology, and they had heart as well. Today's lot have closed minds, deny fact and science, want to say no to everything and everybody, and have NO heart.
Values based on tradition can be frightening, and as history has shown misquided.
Ample examples exist for the diserning mind to grasp.
Government has never been, nor will it ever be, a good samaritan. For it can rob us of the self and turn us into subservient nothings. Smilling all the while as its power is incresed.
Dear Truth101
Good tidings of comfort and joy from Harry Reid too. The Senate Majority Leader has decided that the last few days before Christmas are the opportune moment for a narrow majority of Democrats to stuff ObamaCare, a bill so reckless that it has to be rammed through on a partisan vote on Christmas eve.
Keep throwing your haymakers at the political garbage collectors. In this three ring circus of clownish leftists it is permissible to hit below the belt, they don't have balls, so no worrys. Okay Bambi. We'll try your health insurance care for the next four years while you try our new one. In the spirit of this time of year. Comrade Barack and the socialist-democrats have just declared our beloved Constitution to be null and void. The question now is... just what are are we prepared to do about it?
Citizenry to Zero: "Guess what? -- most of us have great (or better than that death care monstrosity you want to impose on us) insurance too, and we want to keep it. And we want to be able to keep or buy great health insurance into our future, even into our old age. And we also want our children to be able to get great health insurance, and our grandchildren.
"Why don't you and your socialist fellow-travelers in the Senate and House turn-in your great health insurance and sign-on to this monstrosity you want to shove down the citizenry's throats?
"All you socialists are just like the pigs in George Orwell's "Animal Farm" -- all animals are equal but some are more equal than others. Yep, that's the dems in the US Congress."
I wish this is the last nightmare that you give us.
As a country, WE ARE FINISHED.
jadedfellow,
Just what exactly in the healthcare bill prevents you from buying your "great" insurance?
Jade is a major troll. He/she has been hitting all our blogs with the exact same message. If you check his or her blog, you will see that it is a major scam or he/she is promoting prostitution.
Leslie Parsley is that picture really you?
If it is, it's no wonder that you are so angry!
"How can those on the right say that our government was founded on Judeo/Christian principles, then say it's not governments job to help the poor and less fortunate? How can they keep a straight face?"
my take:
how can those on the left say they are preaching judeo/christian values, then say that it is the government's job to force some to give your so called help to others? how can they keep a straight face in perverting the word so blatently? i don't know of any dictionary that uses the word force in its definition of help.
my pappy taught me that an act of help had to be not only consensual but also willingly. anything less than that was not helping but using others to further your own goals and ends.
and that is exactly what the socialists are doing to the rest of you left wingers, using you and using the poor to turn this nation into a nation where free enterprise and individual rights no longer exist.
and i do not know of any Christian value that says that it is helping the poor by forcing them to remain poor in order to receive that help as the government does.
Dingy Harry Reid, in lockstep with his master Barak the Red Avenger and Princess Nancy Lugosi has struck a mortal blow to American freedom.
What a corrupt bunch of scoundrels this administration is proving themselves to be.
Griper - Using computer at work.
Keep on keeping on brother, your take on this one is right on.
Griper,
Please explain where these socialists are. I'd really like to know.
We have a president and his group of advisers who are predominantly center and center-right.Not a leftist among them.
Please,turn off your talk radio and think for yourself!
Observe actions.The administration promotes policy which pours $ into corporate coffers.Look at the liquidity poured into banks while the plans for regulation and oversight are gutted. Look at who benefits from the healthcare bill-the health insurance industry. Do these sound like the actions of a socialist?
Seriously, turn off your radio and pick up a book.
If not buy majority vote, what better system is there to direct our government's actions?
Using the word force represents your disapproval of these decisions. Lucky you live in a country where you can speak against the government, and not permanently disappear.
I understand your feelings. For decades I have had to live under Republican power, that has bankrupted our country. I complain, but they had the majority and the votes to get their agenda through to law.
We do get the government we vote for. That's not to say that the people always make the correct decision. It is to say, that as a society based in the rule of law, we have an obligation to speak out, but when the decision has been made, to support our leaders and our country.
It is totally realistic to disagree with invading Iraq, but support the troops once they are in the fight, and support my President and country that the decision succeeds.
It's realistic to disagree with these social programs being part of American law, but it is not acceptable to not pay the taxes necessary to pay the bills of the government, as a means to try and defeat those laws.
Seems the Republicans, to afraid to go to the American people and tell them they want to terminate these programs (knowing it would be political suicide because Americans have voted for and want these programs) try to kill the programs by cutting off the funds needed to continue these programs.
Of course, at the same time, they are bankrupting America and endangering our existence.
If our politicians (on all sides) were not so inept, corrupted, and negligent; we would not be in such a mess, no matter what programs Americans decide they want.
Yes, government is expensive. Social programs are expensive.
Since when do we not pay for the services and expenses we ask our government to provide?
Since 1983.
Read my post "Mondale Was Right."
Jaded: I may be as ugly as hell but at least I'm honest and don't hide behind some fake identity. Anyway, judging someone by their looks just shows how shallow you and the rest of your cronies are. No substance.
Griper: There are things only the government can do, such as national defense. Those things cost money, and that means taxes need to be collected. Collecting taxes involves an underlying threat of force against people who don't pay them, however far in the background it is. There's no way around that.
The harm done by private insurance companies and unethical Wall Street firms to the people and economy of the country far exceeds anything the government is currently planning to do.
We tried it you guys' way. The result was a recession, a gigantic deficit, and solid electoral wins for our side in 2006 and 2008. Unless you completely reject the concept of democratic legitimacy, those elections constitute a mandate for the Democrats to try and fix the mess the Republicans created -- their way. If the Democrats' solutions do not work or if they displease the majority of the people, the people will express that in 2010 and 2012. Until then, the party that got the mandate exercises it. That's how the system works.
Faded-jello is way out of line here. I understand that this blog welcomes conservatives who want to participate in a serious discussion, but he's obviously not in that category.
Oso said...
Griper,
Please explain where these socialists are. I'd really like to know.
Seriously, turn off your radio and pick up a book."
A Book called Ridiculously No Hope .
Jaded needs to be deleted, first for trolling and second for insulting a much loved friend of ours! Leslie you are not ugly, don't say that!! Jaded get a life, somewhere else!! Truth I hope you do the right thing...
Jaded is a sick asshole who can go to Hell.
Leslie I'm sorry that worthless POS insulted you,it hurts me.
Jaded, beyond ad hom, just proving to everyone what a jerk you are!
Tom,
"Using the word force represents your disapproval of these decisions"
i do not use the word force because it represents my disapproval. i disapprove of these decision because of the use of force necessary to impliment programs like this.
i use the word force because that is what government is, in any form or type.
i use the word force because that is the best one word description of government.
i use the word force because that best describes the reason that people call any government a "necessary evil."
Guys, I have a tougher hide than this. I've had another one from someone else - maybe. Delete. I'm not going to put up with such nonsense. This applies to Anon. comments as well. It's my blog and I can do what I want.
If majority vote to you means forced, then yes, we the people are responsible for this "evil' you describe as government.
Majority rule has been used for thousands of years, because it makes sense. The United States Constitution protects the rights of the minority, which makes even more sense.
Government does force people to comply to the rules made law by the majority.
What would we have without that system? Certainly something I would not be comfortable living in.
Do 300 million people not need some system to be able to live with each other?
What kind of system did you have in mind?
Bureaucracies naturally produce waste and abuses, so does Capitalism.
Elected representatives are supposed to see to it that government runs efficiently, if they are not doing their job whose fault is that?
We hired (voted for) them, we can fire them, and it is our job to supervise them.
Are we to ignore the natural waste product of Capitalism, humans without the means to provide for themselves?
I rarely delete shitheads. Now if Rational Nation or Griper asked me to delete one because his ignorance and lack of good taste is making them or their side look bad, I would as a courtesy to them.
And it gives me a seguey into saying I think Leslie has it going on. Jaded is just a pathetic soul who can't find a date so he blogs between visits to porn sites.
We actually have a pretty good model to show us what America would look like if the hard-line conservatives' dream because a reality. There's a country out there which already works that way.
It's a country with no government social programs, no government regulations, no government oversight of business or finance, no effective taxes, no intrusive government authority at all. As icing on the cake, there is no feminism or gay-rights agitation or secularism, and everybody lives according to traditional religious moral values whether they agree with them or not.
It's called Somalia. A role model to aspire to!
LP,
First, that insult is uncalled for and not representative of class regardless of persuasion. That's kind of like the stuff my 9th graders say to each other.
Truth,
As for your post, I find it an interesting post to read and think about. I'm not so sure I agree with playing the religion card to win an argument on either side.
I don't condone so-called conservatives who throw out their version of religion to condemn those with whom they disagree. I'll assume your argument to be in the vein of using that religious argument to make a point about the ill-advised use of religion to make political points.
Good day sir.
L&OT: Thanks, that's very kind of you. If you remember, I haven't always been the most civil person in the world.But whoever it is should learn to respect their elders. ; )
truth,
i'd never ask that you ban anyone. tis your site and i'm only an invited guest with the privilege of addressing an issue you brought up from my personal point of view. and i think i can say the same for RN in his absense. and i thank ya for this privilege.
Tom,
Mandates are mandates regardless of how you decide and majority rule is just dictatorial as any other method. and it is the only way for a group to come to a group decision.
the big difference is that if we truly believed in the democratic method of choice making then the minority would submissively comply by the decisions of the majority. by that, i mean that once the decision was made the minority would recognize and abide by the will of the majority and in a case like this recognize a "right" as someone proposed earlier or if the tables were turned around recognize that something is not a right. this would bring unity as everyone clamors for instantly. this never occurs tho.
thus, it can be said that everyone likes the idea of democracy only when the decision cooincides with their own. when it doesn't division occurs. reason: no man enjoys being forced to abide by a decision not of his choosing. thus the minority fights to overturn that decision.
as to your idea that the Constitution protects the rights of the minority, i have only this to say. The Constitution is only a document that spells out the rights of the individual. it cannot protect anyone. it is up to the government to abide by and enforce the principles of that document, in theory.
but if we look at history it has been government that has been the violator of those principles not its defender. cases in point would be
1. the interrment of the japanese citizen during WWII
2. the jim crow laws
in the case of #1 it was the federal government who violated the rights of a minority in this nation in the case of #2 it was the state governments who violated the rights of the minority.
where was the constitutional protection for these minorities when they needed it? these minorities were forced to suffer through a loss of rights only because government violated them instead of enforcing them as it should have.
these are but two cases. i could sit here all night and expose many others that would prove my point and i think you can too.
but as shown force is used in all cases, it may not be violent force but force anyways with the threat of the use of violent force to bring compliance.
We do recognize now, laws we made in the past were wrong. We have corrected them, and that has built unity in our society.
There has to be penalties for breaking the law. Yes, that is forcing people to follow the law.
The fact that imperfect humans err in the application of the law, does not make the law useless, or inconsequential. It simply means a mistake was made.
The fact that millions disagree with a law, does not mean they can disregard the law, or break it.
To me, freedom means choice. Every time a law is passed, someone loses a choice, and a little freedom.
I feel it is important for government to eliminate as few choices as possible.
Once something is made illegal, the choice is gone, and freedom is curtailed. Any debate, is over.
Many believe abortion is murder, but many believe, it is not. But if abortion is illegal, the debate is over, another choice is lost, and freedom takes another hit.
Only if abortion remains legal within limits, does choice remain and freedom endures. And yes, I have to swallow living in a society that allows abortion, I also have to recognize that the law protects another persons right to do what I disagree with.
As a member of a free society, I must be ready to fight for the right of other peoples choices, even when I disagree with their choices.
Our justice system is not perfect. In both the cases you cite, the courts and laws did admit the mistake, overturn the earlier courts rulings, make new law to prevent those abuses from happening again, and made reparations to those affected.
That process defines a process that works, as slow as it is. Mistakes and abuses will always happen. Humans are not yet smart enough to make no mistakes.
This does not mean government is a failure, or should be discontinued. It just means we have to try harder to make it work.
There is little more that humans can do but correct the mistakes they make, except to make an effort to learn from our mistakes, so we do not repeat them.
Just as waste in social programs is not a reason to terminate the program that serves millions well. It means government has to work harder to eliminate waste.
Tom,
this has been a most interesting debate and i thank you for it but unfortunately, in our zeal to either persuade or learn, we have gone completely off the topic of truth's post.
and the sad part of that is that it makes it a very difficult journey back to the topic and any hope of agreement.
so, i'll close the debate with a wish that you and all in here have a very Merry Christmas.
The topic doesn't matter as long as the comments are interesting. At least here anyway.
Well said, Truth! The bill stinks, but the original Medicare wasn't that great either. I think that to give the GOP a win at this point would be more harmful to the American people than passing this mess and advocating change, leading eventually to single payer, before the ink of Obama's signature dries.
Post a Comment