Shallow Thinking, Schooled

From the comments of this Anchoress post:

I don’t get it. As a Catholic I think each person has a right to proper health care, as well as proper nutrition and shelter and clothig. JP2 said as much in one of his encyclicals. The Catholic tradition is to help the poor, not to leave them in the gutter, unable to take care of themselves. In Canada (a country with a Catholic tradition) we have a very good public health care system. Rich people do not deserve better care than the poor. We are all of equal importance and dignity.

----

[Whoever said "rich people deserve better health care than the poor?" Put your straw man away, please; I have no patience for people putting words in my mouth I am in favor of everyone having health care. I just don't believe that the entire nation needs to be overhauled to do that. We have 30,000.000 uninsured? The gov't could have insured them for a comparative pittance, considering the money they've wasted on bailouts and "saving" jobs that either didn't need saving or really paid off the debts of fellow politicians. If the gov't really wanted to reform health care, they'd be talking about real industry competition, reasonable tort reform and creative measures similar to what Rudy Giuliani did in NYC, whereby uninsured were able to buy into the same insurance the city workers had. There is no reason why a sliding scale of govt assistance w/ regards to insurance could not have been developed. If you want to play "I don't understand, you must be a bad and uncompassionate Catholic if you don't want Obamacare" be my guest, but please, that argument does not play here. To suggest that the ONLY way to do this is ONE way, and that must be the OBAMA way is partisan nonsense, and nothing more. And btw, the gov't has admitted that even after all is said and done, ten million will still not have healthcare. Please forgive my tone; that was a bit less polite than I had intended.-admin]

----

But from where does that tradition get its human resources and funding? From the hearts and wallets of people who voluntarily offered up their time, talent, and treasure to support the poor.

Bishops and priests did not threaten Catholics with jail time, or exorbitant fines, or bringing the full weight of the Vatican down on individuals who do not provide enough in charitable donations.

All things that the government is doing. Buy an appropriate plan or pay a penalty. The health care bill includes provisions for home visitations for expectant parents and those with young children. Will the government social worker who comes to MY door see our wall of icons and bookcase full of religious texts and decide we’re unfit parents?

Those who seek to implement socialized medicine have an obvious disdain for human life, from conception through old age, wherein they actively seek to eliminate the unwanted, the imperfect, the undesirable. When they are in charge of the purse strings, expect the groups they do not like to face the short end of the stick. They will not respect the rights of Catholics, or any other person of sincere faith, to object to participating in abortions (which will be funded by the tax dollars of people who find abortion to be intrinsically evil), or prescribing contraception, or offering fertility services (in vitro) to lesbian couples. We are supposed to serve, in charity, a system that does not respect our beliefs and values? We cannot compromise our immortal souls for a political cause.

As for the equality of which you speak, all the socialized system of medicine will do is make a majority of us equal in sub-standard care while those who are rich or affluent enough can afford better. It will not make health care more affordable or accessible for anyone except the extremely wealthy.

Catholic teaching also speaks of the responsibility of the individual; refusing to care for yourself or your loved ones is a grave matter. I, sadly, believe a lot of people who say they can’t afford insurance could, if they prioritized their budgets. Many states have programs that insure people who make 3, 4, 5 times the poverty level (for a family of four, that’s around $20,000/year, I believe). Which means people who make $60k, $80k, $100k/ year could not have to pay for health insurance when people who make far less find a way to do it. I’m not working right now, but we figured out how to get insurance coverage even though it means we’ll have less disposable income. Could we qualify for a government program? Perhaps. Enabling people to live relying on the government’s ability to tax others does nothing for THEIR dignity or THEIR soul – there is blessing and grace achieved through hard, honest work. And we’ve lost that.

I do not disagree that those who are genuinely, truly poor should receive some form of assistance. No one is saying they shouldn’t. At this point in time, anyone can walk into an ER anywhere in this nation and – by law – receive the best care this nation has to offer for little or no cost. There are signs posted in ever ER I’ve ever been in stating this fact in plain English.

Why then, do we need to destroy a system that is maybe 10% flawed?

Because it’s about control. It’s about giving the government the ability to control our bodies, our lives, our families. And that is contrary to Catholic teaching in many, many ways.

----

"When you tell me I have the obligation to pay other people’s bills, that is where I draw the line"

So we won’t tell you, Peter.

We’ll simply take it from you.

And if there is some person out there trained in healthcare who doesn’t want to provide a particular medical service, we’ll simply force them to do it.

After all — people have a right to proper health care, nutrition, shelter, and clothing. And if they have a right to something, then they the authority to enforce that right in order to obtain it.

And if you are ever sick or hungry or want a place to stay and something to wear, simply go over to the home of those who insist that we have a right to these things and demand that they provide them to you, and if they don’t, simply go raid their medicine cabinet, eat their food, sleep in their bed, and take their clothes. After all, you have a right to these things and someone has to provide them.

What fools the Founding Fathers that you cite were. They thought that you merely had the liberty to seek these things without undue impediments, including government interference. In other words, they thought that government should get the hell out of the way to let people provide for themselves and have the ability to likewise provide for their less fortunate neighbor. They didn’t realize that we had the right to demand that other people provide these things for us.

I confess, that in reading the Gospels where Jesus tells us about doing charity (love of neighbor), I missed the part where He snatched all the money and possessions from the rich man, or where He patted the tax collectors on the back for their good work in collecting money to finance those public services that we have a right to, or where the Good Samaritan takes the wounded guy to the inn and tells the innkeeper to put him up for free before going to chase down the two who passed by to take their money as payment for his transportation services.

----