It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court debates the future of Obamacare

page: 11
24
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JimTSpock
 


Less government involvement in everyones daily life is preferred.

There are some who believe it is up to the government to take care of them....those people are parasites and shouldnt be involved in any policy discussion.




posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
and others appear to be willing to forfeit it for cheaper labor and larger profits
to each their own I guess
If Hobby Lobby pulls this one off I am sure to win my exemption!



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


no it's not, when your willing support comprise, instead of supporting individual rights.
that no better than supporting a unjust law. in truth a individual may have to comply with a law to avoid a distasteful result from not doing it, so they can fight the law but that is not comprise, that is living to fight another day.

to give in on your beliefs, by compromising is just the as bad as support. you can't be can't be counted on to fight for your rights.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


Perhaps you could look at some other countries healthcare systems and see how they do it and get some ideas about how you might like to have a healthcare system. It's just a suggestion don't go mental. I'm sure most of us will agree the current US system needs change and doesn't work well and is too expensive. That's what I think. But in the end you Americans will have to work it out for yourselves. Good luck with that it looks like a mess.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   

JimTSpock
reply to post by macman
 


Perhaps you could look at some other countries healthcare systems and see how they do it and get some ideas about how you might like to have a healthcare system. It's just a suggestion don't go mental. I'm sure most of us will agree the current US system needs change and doesn't work well and is too expensive. That's what I think. But in the end you Americans will have to work it out for yourselves. Good luck with that it looks like a mess.


Yes, it needs to change. It needs to return to the idea where people are responsible for themselves. Not carrying the weight for others.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


WHAT? I'm not allowed to compromise and be a Libertarian? That is absurd! Compromise is supposed to be how our government works. That is how things get done. Both sides realize that they are NEVER going to get EXACTLY what they want and give up on certain issues to favor other issues. You just effectively supported what is currently disastrously wrong with our country, bitter partisan line toeing. You need to rethink your priorities if you think that people are supposed to be completely unyielding on all issues and never compromise.

Besides, I'd rather compromise on something like health care, which helps people in need, then morality issues like drugs, gambling, and prostitution or 2nd Amendment issues (or any amendment issues for that matter).
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   

JimTSpock
I've been following this thread a bit and it's been ... interesting. I realize I'm somewhat of an outsider and not an American. Just an observation but it seems like some of you are more concerned with calling each other names like socialist and redneck etc than having an actual healthcare system that works. I'm sure we're all aware how bad the US healthcare system is.

Some seem opposed to the idea of a universal healthcare system which if done well would probably be cheaper than the current US system which seems to be a disaster. Even if you don't like the idea of it I'm sure everyone would want better healthcare which costs less taxpayer money. Other countries do it and so can America.

Call me a socialist or whatever name you feel is appropriate if it makes you feel better but I am an Australian and our healthcare system is better than America's. Reasonably intelligent educated people in America have some idea about the world outside of America's borders. And some of you think we're all foreigner hippy socialist commies! lol. By the way Australia is not a communist country.


I'm pretty sure that Obamacare was designed so we would all be BEGGING for a universal health system to swoop in and rescue us.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Cyprian
reply to post by macman
 


Why such vitriol for Progressives? progress = moving forward. Conserve = staying the same. And brother. the same is pretty effed up.


Clearly, it depends on your definition of progress. I believe that the best hope for the human race is personal responsibility and minimal government. From my perspective, progress looks a lot different than from yours.

If I started a political party and called it the "incontrovertibly correct party", would you accept my definition of correct?
edit on 26-3-2014 by greencmp because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


Actually to an extent whether you like it or not your government does 'take care of you'. You are bound by the laws of America and are subject to protection and also prosecution by these laws, your government also protects you from foreign aggression with the armed forces.

If someone kills you, god forbid, the state will try to find and prosecute your killer. Likewise if you are assaulted or robbed. All citizens are subject to the rule of law. Some more so than others but that's a different story...

It sounds like you don't like the whole idea of government and it is always some kind of infringement on your freedom and to an extent it is but it does provide certain protections and without it sadly it would be anarchy. Which some may find preferable.

I'm sure we all want a smaller more accountable government and less taxes and more freedom but is this likely to happen? Sadly not any time soon I don't think.

Money buys power and money and big business are running Washington, and the rest of the world. There is so much money and profit at stake the government works for big business now. As long as the people with the real power are making as much profit as they can the government will bend to their will. I think the US healthcare system is an example of this. It's a big profit making system for all the companies involved.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


Indeed it was. The only problem is that its been a disaster from day one. I'm not sure that anyone but the true believers are going to buy into an even bigger government solution than this one.

As for this case, it seems to me that if HL loses, you can pretty much kiss religious freedom in this country goodbye, because it can be overridden at any time by regulations and mandates passed by Congress.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Krazysh0t
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


WHAT? I'm not allowed to compromise and be a Libertarian? That is absurd! Compromise is supposed to be how our government works. That is how things get done. Both sides realize that they are NEVER going to get EXACTLY what they want and give up on certain issues to favor other issues. You just effectively supported what is currently disastrously wrong with our country, bitter partisan line toeing. You need to rethink your priorities if you think that people are supposed to be completely unyielding on all issues and never compromise.

Besides, I'd rather compromise on something like health care, which helps people in need, then morality issues like drugs, gambling, and prostitution or 2nd Amendment issues (or any amendment issues for that matter).
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)


no it is not, our government works on debate and what is best for the the whole of the country. when you compromise the rights of some for others that is never good.

where would we be if the founders/ framers that fought for the bill of right be, if they would have gave up and compromised. i hate to imagine it.



Besides, I'd rather compromise on something like health care, which helps people in need, then morality issues like drugs, gambling, and prostitution or 2nd Amendment issues (or any amendment issues for that matter


you forgot to include birth control, that is a morality issues which is what this thread started out about.
healthcare is one thing, and brith control is another. you can prevent pregnancy a couple way, one is is real simple, if you don't want to have a child don't have sex, or use your own money to buy birth control.

just because you work for me don't expect me to fund your life style, by being a whore dog ( chaser of women), hoe, promiscuous, or fund your family planing.

now if your life is in danger because your pregnant, i have no problem paying to save your life. but just because you cant keep your pants on and control yourself, don't expect me to pay for it because i'm your boss.





edit on 26-3-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by vor78
 





As for this case, it seems to me that if HL loses, you can pretty much kiss religious freedom in this country goodbye, because it can be overridden at any time by regulations and mandates passed by Congress.


Yes well, call me a progressive
but I think that's a good thing! We don't stone people for their attitudes or sexual indiscretion any more. It's illegal, in the US, to sell daughters into marriages or offer child brides to pay off debts. We don't tolerate female genital mutilation. Women are allowed to drive, own property and vote.

The 10 Commandments DON'T belong in courthouses, creationism has NO place in the public school science classrooms, and religion has no place dictating what legal medications patients can use, or regulate what doctors can say or administer to their patients.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


all you are paying for is health insurance for men and women! you are not paying for the birth control the insurance companies are!
and just because a person eats three times as much as he needs to and is a pig doesn't mean his employer should have to pay for his heart attack either! he chose his lifestyle also!

by the way there are many married women who use birth control also! I suppose they are whores also right?



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JimTSpock
 


Govt is a necessary evil for us and should be as small as possible.

Not wanting further Govt encroachment is pretty standard.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


your paying the insurance company to cover your employees, they take mine and your money to do it.
if you want to pay for it fine, i don't want my money to pay for someone elses' responsibility, or lack of self control.

how you say that i'm not paying for their coverage when it come's out of my pocket as a employer.


edit on 26-3-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)





by the way there are many married women who use birth control also! I suppose they are whores also right?

before the employer had the right to chose what plans he provide their employees, now they don't.
if you paid for it out of your part and took responsibility. but if you expect me to pay for your life style, and fund your family planning, that's your problem not mine.

and don't play like you didn't know what i was talking about, your far from a being idiot.
edit on 26-3-2014 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:28 PM
link   
has anyone taken the time to find out why it is that the companies offer health insurance as a benefit to begin with??
It's really kind of interesting. I believe it was during WW2 the workforce wasn't big enough to meet the demand (I think because so many were off fighting the war!) Well the companies were faced with having to compete for their workforce. At first they were just offering more and more money in pay but the gov't finally decided that this was creating problems so the put a limit on the pay they could offer.. So the companies began offering better benefits of which health insurance was the cream of the crop! So as we can see here again we wouldn't be having the problems we have today if the initial rights of businesses and people were respected then!
or in other words if the gov't hadn't stuck their nose where it didn't belong!

having our healthcare so tied to employers was and is a bad idea anyways! if you get hurt or sick enough what happens? oh you get too sick to be able to work! Then well unless you're really lucky you end up losing y our job b ecause you care hindered by your health and along with the job you also lose your health insurance!
Obamacare does nothing except ingrain the responsibility for health insurance into the employers court! I don't believe it should be there anyways. We'd be better off to just get rid of the insurance companies at least for the basic care and let everything settle down to where the people are responsible for the bills. Maybe more would look at their bills and realize just how outrageous they are.
besides many of the care providers before obamacare stepped in were finding that they could operate much better without the insurance they saved money by not having to process all the insurance forms and they were able to pass that savings down to the patient which made it affordable for them. Not to mention that the doctor was much freer to determine the best treatment for the patient.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


As small as possible is subjective and debatable, but yes I'd agree.

Something I've noticed with the US and Australian, and most of the western world, governments is that they just seem to get bigger and bigger. They are adding more and more departments and bureaucracies and regulations, in Australia we call it the nanny state, there always seems to be some new rule or law for this and that, it's getting ridiculous. I think most governments are outstanding at one thing, waste and mismanagement of taxpayer funds. And doing shady deals with their buddies.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Ok I am through talking to you, you refuse to understand my points and instead skew and warp them then straw man attack them. I've explained myself throughly several times to you as well as shown you other posts I've written to other people in this thread that outline my reasoning, but you just keep insisting that what I am doing is some sort of violation of the Libertarian code or something. I'm done with this petty nonsense. Good day.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by JimTSpock
 


So.......why do you promote Govt run Healthcare?



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 

do the employees also pitch into this pool of money??
aren't they also paying?
so you as an employer should have your religious rights preserved but not the employees that share the same religious views? Even it they refuse to buy into the insurance scam they are still taxed and that money is being used for it.
you say you have no problem paying for a women once pregnant if it is found that the pregnancy is endangering her life
what about those times when it is known before conception that there is a danger?
and I would like to state again that according to that religion that some employees want the right to practice in this area


The women are taught that God does not give them the permission right whatever to say no to the husband!
so even if she didn't want to have sex it supposedly would be a sin to refuse the husband.
even if she wanted not to have any more kids it would be a sin to take the birth control if the husband didn't want her to
and even if she wanted another child it would be a sin not to take the birth control if the husband wanted her to!

and Hobby Lobby is griping about their rights being taken away from them!

and oh yes all the women who are using birth control are just whoring around!



new topics




 
24
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join