Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

As the RLP/FLC candidate for President, I pledge to combat nepotism by getting my dad (Humph), brother (Roads) and cousin (deep state director Miencraft) to get out of politics

Jadentopian Order

Fascist Dred wrote:Damn Lewds

You need to stop being so anti-memetic

Rateria, Libiceland

The States Of Balloon wrote:You need to stop being so anti-memetic

Only when you are bowing before meh.

The States Of Balloon wrote:You need to stop being so anti-memetic

Fascist Dred wrote:Only when you are bowing before meh.

Y'all need Roads

Muh Roads, Rateria

When you finish listening to nightcore and want to put on something more sophisticated

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mOgbYiQjoEQ

Rateria

Hyderbourg wrote:What does that mean

I need help to find the discord link

Czekania wrote:I need help to find the discord link

Ignoring for a second that that's completely unrelated to what you're quoting, the link to the Libertatem discord is up on the WFE, in big green letters with arrows pointing to it.

Libiceland

Pevvania wrote:(deep state director Miencraft)

They can't know yet!

Pevvania, Fascist Dred

Remember that time communists realized communism doesn't work? I wonder why that isn't brought up when discussing communism.

Jadentopian Order wrote:They can't know yet!

Pevvania wrote:As the RLP/FLC candidate for President, I pledge to combat nepotism by getting my dad (Humph), brother (Roads) and cousin (deep state director Miencraft) to get out of politics

Supreme General King Miencraft has a nice ring to it.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Rateria

The States Of Balloon wrote:Remember that time communists realized communism doesn't work? I wonder why that isn't brought up when discussing communism.

If communists worked, then they would understand why communism doesn't work.

Miencraft, Narland, Rateria, Fascist Dred, Hops Republic, Libiceland

Fascist Dred wrote:Supreme General King Miencraft has a nice ring to it.

I prefer Supreme Imperial Godking myself.

Miencraft wrote:I prefer Supreme Imperial Godking myself.

Your wish is my command my dear leader!

Pevvania wrote:As the RLP/FLC candidate for President, I pledge to combat nepotism by getting my dad (Humph), brother (Roads) and cousin (deep state director Miencraft) to get out of politics

can we equally force you out too? and everyone completely?

Pevvania

Fascist Dred wrote:Your wish is my command my dear leader!

dred accepted another god as leader. he's now demoted to peasant.

Muh Roads wrote:dred accepted another god as leader. he's now demoted to peasant.

Mien's a god?

Miencraft wrote:I prefer Supreme Imperial Godking myself.

Fascist Dred wrote:Mien's a god?

Forius wrote:Hmmm, religious conflict...?

no conflict. i am the only true god in Libertatem.

The United States Of Patriots

Miencraft wrote:Ignoring for a second that that's completely unrelated to what you're quoting, the link to the Libertatem discord is up on the WFE, in big green letters with arrows pointing to it.

This was an hour ago, ignore the old text

Czekania wrote:This was an hour ago, ignore the old text

Okay but did you find it?

Libiceland wrote:Okay but did you find it?

Yah, check #general

Libiceland

Muh Roads wrote:no conflict. i am the only true god in Libertatem.

Ah, well...that's actually not true.

Post self-deleted by Fascist Dred.

Muh Roads wrote:no conflict. i am the only true god in Libertatem.

>mhomen

Muh Roads wrote:no conflict. i am the only true god in Libertatem.

The Aradites wrote:>mhomen

>Dred

Fascist Dred wrote:>Dred

>Roads

The United States Of Patriots

I nominate [nation=short]Boes_Othan[/nation] to fill the position of Chancellor of State.

Pevvania, Rateria, Fascist Dred

Humpheria wrote:I nominate [nation=short]Boes_Othan[/nation] to fill the position of Chancellor of State.

He still has the default flag nobody cares about him

Boes Othan, Kohalo

The States Of Balloon wrote:He still has the default flag nobody cares about him

Cwosssaaaaah

Rateria

The States Of Balloon wrote:He still has the default flag nobody cares about him

*Her and it's actually the default flag with a cwoissah in it

Miencraft, Rateria, Boes Othan

I like my cwoissah with bahkun, aggs n chis

Pevvania, Rateria, Boes Othan

Telegram me if your coming to movie night on Friday

I'm with her

Rateria, Jadentopian Order, Boes Othan, Kohalo

Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

Narland, Muh Roads, Rateria, Hyderbourg

Hexvia wrote:Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

Howdy. You can come join our discord if you like, link's up in the WFE.

Rateria, Hyderbourg

Hexvia wrote:Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

Welcome, I am a representative of the REFORM Party and can help show you the ropes of the region as a mentor, I've sent you a Telegram.

Hyderbourg

Hexvia wrote:Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

Forius wrote:Welcome, I am a representative of the REFORM Party and can help show you the ropes of the region as a mentor, I've sent you a Telegram.

Hmm, should probably let [nation=short]Libiceland[/nation] handle the mentoring, but it's great to see how interested you are!

Perhaps you can be CCd to the telegrams so you can be more familiar with the mentoring system.

Libiceland, Kohalo

When you're in a 3v1 debate and they've somehow twisted your words into supporting neonazis

For context, I got into an argument over the CNN debacle. I supported HAS, my opponents supported CNN. Will post full summary if requested

Miencraft, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Libiceland

The States Of Balloon wrote:When you're in a 3v1 debate and they've somehow twisted your words into supporting neonazis

For context, I got into an argument over the CNN debacle. I supported HAS, my opponents supported CNN. Will post full summary if requested

Please

The States Of Balloon wrote:When you're in a 3v1 debate and they've somehow twisted your words into supporting neonazis

For context, I got into an argument over the CNN debacle. I supported HAS, my opponents supported CNN. Will post full summary if requested

requested

Hexvia wrote:Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

I <3 u

>be me

>in online chat room, about ten people

>decide to bring up the CNN incident as a conversation topic

>find out that there are CNN supporters online (very liberal chat room, used by a couple commies, so this is to be expected)

>provide my perspective (that CNN is threatening to release HAS's personal information if he says anything anti-CNN)

>others, two at this point, say maintain that CNN has this dude's information "because why not if Obama posted a meme on his twitter you'd want to know who made it)

>I think that's bullshit but I don't care enough to argue

>actually, I do care enough to argue, so I discuss it for a bit with them before losing interest and dropping the topic

>one of my opponents claims that neonazis deserve to be in just as much danger as their views put them in

>I respond quite dickishly ("So, no danger then?") and get kicked, Fair enough

>I log back in and try to explain myself

>Eventually ops let me speak and I attempt to explain myself

>It goes about as well as you expect, meaning I fumble it up

>due to the length of the message, I have to send it in multiple parts

>follow the first message with a second message stating that I'm not done yet and that there will be more to the explanation (the rest of the message is just me apologizing for any offense)

>get interrupted anyway

>I then spent the next 5-8 minutes trying to explain my position unsuccessfully

> for reference my position is that holding a belief and acting upon it are different and that simply holding a belief harms nobody. Expressing beliefs is not brought up in the conversation because it doesn't come to mind, but it would fall under holding beliefs in my position

>Third guy joins in, doesn't affect things too much

>they make some bullsh!t argument about how allowing harmful beliefs to exist at all makes them worse, I make some bullsh!t argument about how silencing another's speech leads to aggressive behavior (basically the pressure cooker thought experiment but with less pressure cooker)

>I'm not really sure what hAppens here, apparently I get framed as someone who supports neonazis because I allow their beliefs to exist?

>aggressions rise until an op shuts down the conversation

>I vent my concerns to an op privately and finally manage to fully explain my position

>I exit the chat room and go stroke my cock to relieve my built up frustration

Miencraft, Pevvania, Rateria, Hyderbourg, Fascist Dred, Jadentopian Order

The States Of Balloon wrote:When you're in a 3v1 debate and they've somehow twisted your words into supporting neonazis

For context, I got into an argument over the CNN debacle. I supported HAS, my opponents supported CNN. Will post full summary if requested

Requested

Czekania wrote:Requested

Already there 40 minutes before your request.

Hexvia wrote:Was in Capitalist Libertarian Freedom Region and moved here because it kind of sucked and I saw an embassy to this region and I like Latin.

Hey all, I'm a libertarian and I support Anarcho-Capitalism as outlined by the Mises Institute.

Not really one for regional politics.

Hey, my main nation used to reside there for a bit!

Post self-deleted by Miencraft.

And now for a no-context statement:

The social contract does not exist.

Pevvania, Rateria

Miencraft wrote:And now for a no-context statement:

The social contract does not exist.

Social contract? More like social conSTRUCT lmao I hate white america

Miencraft wrote:Already there 40 minutes before your request.

Shush boy

Aaand I got a one-week ban for disrupting chat.

The States Of Balloon wrote:Aaand I got a one-week ban for disrupting chat.

Oh wait, this does mean that there are partial logs of the incident out there. Should I link them?

The States Of Balloon wrote:Oh wait, this does mean that there are partial logs of the incident out there. Should I link them?

Do whatever you want.

The States Of Balloon wrote:Oh wait, this does mean that there are partial logs of the incident out there. Should I link them?

Plz do

Fascist Dred wrote:Plz do

Aight.

http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-2176130/tomatointhemirror

Logs are in second post, first post is something unrelated from a while back.

The States Of Balloon wrote:Aight.

http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-2176130/tomatointhemirror

Logs are in second post, first post is something unrelated from a while back.

" if Obama tweeted a picture you'd want to know who made it"

Is this seriously their justification for doxing someone over a meme?

Jadentopian Order wrote:" if Obama tweeted a picture you'd want to know who made it"

Is this seriously their justification for doxing someone over a meme?

Yes

And let us not forget the wonderful words of tawny:

"neo-nazis deserve to be in at least as much danger as they're putting me in with their existence and views"

Yes, because the very existence of these viewpoints DIRECTLY HARMS LGBT people. Oh, I'm sorry. LBTQIANABPBOIMFAG* people.

*Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, Nonbinary, Agender, Bigender, Pansexual, Black, Otherkin, Immigrant, Muslim, Fake and Gay

At least the reason for banning was legitimate, even if I feel I was not entirely at fault here. I'll give them that much.

Every time I go through these logs I find something else wrong. "Borderline implicit threats"?

Why do people think the US Constitution is a living document? Everything it means is already written down right there on it. Its meaning doesn't change just because a few guys in robes says it means something else. You wanna change what it means, you can change what it says. There's procedure for that.

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, Hyderbourg, Fascist Dred, Libiceland

Miencraft wrote:Why do people think the US Constitution is a living document? Everything it means is already written down right there on it. Its meaning doesn't change just because a few guys in robes says it means something else. You wanna change what it means, you can change what it says. There's procedure for that.

But hate speech

The States Of Balloon wrote:But hate speech

Seriously though I don't know how people can go "Hate speech isn't protected by the first amendment" when the first words of the first amendment are literally "Congress shall make no law".

Hate speech is totally protected, yo.

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, Hyderbourg, The United States Of Patriots, Fascist Dred, Kohalo

Miencraft wrote:Seriously though I don't know how people can go "Hate speech isn't protected by the first amendment" when the first words of the first amendment are literally "Congress shall make no law".

Hate speech is totally protected, yo.

If I want to discuss my plans to put a bullet through the head of every Hispanic in this country it is well within my rights to do so.

The States Of Balloon wrote:If I want to discuss my plans to put a bullet through the head of every Hispanic in this country it is well within my rights to do so.

Sure is. The difference people don't seem to understand is between saying you want to commit mass murder and actually committing mass murder.

The First Amendment wasn't written so people could talk about the weather. It was so people could say their thoughts, protest their opinions and express themselves how they want no matter how outrageous.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Narland, Republic Of Minerva, Rateria, Hyderbourg, The United States Of Patriots, Libiceland

Mien is on fire today

Miencraft

It's true though. Want """free""" healthcare, gun control and a welfare state? Sure - as long as you pass amendments allowing all of that, since I don't recall James Madison lamenting the lack of socialised industries.

Narland, Rateria

Pevvania wrote:Want """free""" healthcare

Universal healthcare is, funny enough, not permitted in the United States as per the 13th Amendment, since the doctors would have to be slaves in order to be forced to treat anyone who comes in.

Pevvania, Narland, Rateria, The United States Of Patriots, Fascist Dred

Miencraft wrote:Universal healthcare is, funny enough, not permitted in the United States as per the 13th Amendment, since the doctors would have to be slaves in order to be forced to treat anyone who comes in.

I wouldn't exactly compare doctors in universal healthcare to slaves. Would you consider members of the police force as slaves as well?

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=416175

Just a reminder that God actually does hate fags. Why should we listen to him though?

The States Of Balloon wrote:Just a reminder that God actually does hate fags. Why should we listen to him though?

What?

Kohalo wrote:What?

Haven't you read the Bible?

When they disregard the electoral college

Kohalo wrote:I wouldn't exactly compare doctors in universal healthcare to slaves. Would you consider members of the police force as slaves as well?

The police are already government employees - they have a specific job that already and by definition involves everyone.

Doctors, on the other hand, are private employees. Provide universal healthcare, and doctors suddenly are required to provide their services to everyone, probably for no compensation since healthcare would presumably to be "free", even if you're not insured or if you can't actually pay for the treatment (of course in some cases doctors will still treat you even if you can't afford it and they'll figure out how to charge you for it so that you can, but in this case you're just walking in and taking their services without compensation).

The States Of Balloon wrote:Just a reminder that God actually does hate fags. Why should we listen to him though?

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." ~Leviticus 18:22, for anyone wondering.

Jadentopian Order

Miencraft wrote:"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." ~Leviticus 18:22, for anyone wondering.

But how does that mean God hates gays? If anything this Verse condemns that act not the people doing it.

The United States Of Patriots, Kohalo

Fascist Dred wrote:But how does that mean God hates gays? If anything this Verse condemns that act not the people doing it.

shrugs

Probably Leviticus 20:13, "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Hyderbourg, Jadentopian Order

"Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. You can't expect to wield supreme executive power, just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you. I mean, if I went round, sayin' I was an Emperor, just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away! Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed! Oh, what a giveaway, did you hear that, did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about. Did you see him repressing me? You saw it didn't you?"

Rateria

The States Of Balloon wrote:Haven't you read the Bible?

I've taken numerous Bible studies and Catechism classes, I can assure you that God doesn't "hate fags", the act of homosexuality is morally wrong according to the Bible (in the Old and New Testaments) as it is using our sexual instincts wrongly. Even biologically, man and woman have evolved for one another, and not for each other.

It also might be noteworthy that the Catholic Church's basic teachings (the Catechism) outlines that discrimination against homosexuals is against God, and the Vatican City has supported the decriminalization of sexual activity between those of the same sex since 2008.

Miencraft wrote:shrugs

Probably Leviticus 20:13, "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

When reading the Old Testament, it is important to understand the three kinds of laws that we study while reading the commands outlined in the Torah. Many people when reading the Torah (usually mid-Leviticus) get uncomfortable by the commands God has laid out for us and why they aren't followed today. Many will ask, "Why must we follow 'thou shalt not commit adultery' but ignore 'do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material' (Leviticus 19:19)"

In scripture, "The Law" refers to the more than 600 regulations that Moses passed down to the Israelites in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy (which including Genesis, make up the "Torah", or five books of Moses).

There are three types of laws, civil regulations such as property rights (yay!), marriage and divorce, laws sanctioning theft, murder and other crimes, health regulations, etcetera. Then there are ritual instructions that make up the sacrificial system, festivals (like Hannukah in the book of Maccabees if you're using a Catholic Bible), and the specific features of the Tabernacle. Then there are moral principles, like sexual ethics, the Ten Commandments, etcetera. These three types of laws are generally referred to as the civil, ceremonial, and moral law.

What the New Testament tells us is that the civil law was how God shaped the Israelite, or ancient Hebrew society. You see, ancient Israel according to the Old Testament was a theocratic state ruled directly under Yahweh, who was very active with the Jewish people. God set the punishment for sin as death in Genesis (2:16-17), while this may seem cruel at first, it is important to realize that in the Torah, the people knew they were sinning. They were directly disobeying God and His commandments knowingly (also known as a mortal sin in the Catholic Church), so the punishment was death. Jesus later freed us from this punishment, with eternal life (Romans 6:23).

All ceremonial and civil laws were fulfilled by Jesus' crucifixion (Hebrews 9:11-14), and at the moment He cried "It is finished," all of the ceremonial and civic laws were declared null and void. This is shown in Matthew 27:51, when the curtain of the temple that divided the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place was torn in two.

Hopefully that was able to clear some things up on some misconceptions on the new covenant and Mosaic law.

Miencraft wrote:The police are already government employees - they have a specific job that already and by definition involves everyone.

Doctors, on the other hand, are private employees. Provide universal healthcare, and doctors suddenly are required to provide their services to everyone, probably for no compensation since healthcare would presumably to be "free", even if you're not insured or if you can't actually pay for the treatment (of course in some cases doctors will still treat you even if you can't afford it and they'll figure out how to charge you for it so that you can, but in this case you're just walking in and taking their services without compensation).

I'll be referring to single payer healthcare when I say "universal healthcare" as that is the most common and is the one advocated by the current Democratic Party's platform, notably by the Senator from Vermong, Bernie Sanders.

The job that the police department does involves everyone by definition as much as universal healthcare does. I'm assuming you'll use the common argument that if someone doesn't want healthcare, they shouldn't have to buy it (which I completely agree with), so it doesn't involve everyone, as only the sick are directly involved. However, it is the same with emergency services. I've only had to call police once for an emergency, and I know many that have never called the police, yet they should still be guaranteed that emergency services will come to them if needed, does this make members of the police force, in your words, slaves?

By the hypocritic oath, doctors would already be "required" to provide care and treatment for someone who didn't have coverage or the money to pay for it, and I've never heard of a single case of when someone was denied emergency treatment because they didn't have insurance (only after, when they got a bill for hundreds of thousands of dollars). Your whole point lies on the assumption that emergency services involve everyone (which they do) and healthcare does not (which they do, using the same argument of never having to call for them). Let's say in a scenario that emergency services are privately provided, that you heard of someone who was afraid to seek help from emergency services and waited until the very last minute because they couldn't afford the bill. Seems cruel, right? It is the same with healthcare. Why are emergency services a guaranteed right? Because often times, it's a life or death situation, and if that makes the right to emergency services a right, then it should also make healthcare a right.

Of course it's not "free". When people refer to it as "free", they're saying it's free for the consumers who partake in the services, which really isn't that hard to comprehend and I find it absurd that you just use semantics against the idea instead of actual reasoning. Should taxes be used for emergency services? I believe so, as it's the government's job to protect the people and their rights (as outlined in our founding documents). Using that same line of thinking (should taxes be used so everyone can have access to things that protect them and their rights?), healthcare should also be funded by taxes.

Which by the way, in a single payer system all healthcare is still carried out by private companies (doctors, hospitals, etcetera), it's just that everybody pays said private healthcare providers through the government. Which would dramatically lower the cost of administrative services (which is one of the reasons why the United States already spends more than any other nation on healthcare).

Kohalo wrote:everybody pays said private healthcare providers through the government

I'm a healthy guy. Why should I pay healthcare providers for services I don't use?

Kohalo wrote:Should taxes be used for emergency services?

No. Ideally, if I need an emergency service, I'll call up a provider, they'll come help me, and once they've done that I'll pay them for having done their job. I generally don't call ambulances, the fire department, or the police (which really don't have much of a purpose beyond broader community security - if your house gets broken into, you can't rely on the cops to show up on time, you have to use your weapons to defend yourself) so I shouldn't pay for them. I'll pay for them when I need them, and as it stands, I don't need them. I don't use them. I shouldn't be forced to pay for services I won't use.

Of course, you could argue that the taxes paying for emergency services are kind of like insurance. And I have a funny feeling that if you were to privatize emergency services, you'd see emergency service companies actually selling plans like that - pay a set amount every so often and you get access to the services overall cheaper than if you paid after a call, and when you do need them you can be sure you won't need to worry about paying them since you already do that.

Miencraft wrote:I'm a healthy guy. Why should I pay healthcare providers for services I don't use?

I've already went over this.

I live in a good suburban neighborhood, why should I have to pay for emergency services I don't use?

Miencraft wrote:No. Ideally, if I need an emergency service, I'll call up a provider, they'll come help me, and once they've done that I'll pay them for having done their job. I generally don't call ambulances, the fire department, or the police (which really don't have much of a purpose beyond broader community security - if your house gets broken into, you can't rely on the cops to show up on time, you have to use your weapons to defend yourself) so I shouldn't pay for them. I'll pay for them when I need them, and as it stands, I don't need them. I don't use them. I shouldn't be forced to pay for services I won't use.

Of course, you could argue that the taxes paying for emergency services are kind of like insurance. And I have a funny feeling that if you were to privatize emergency services, you'd see emergency service companies actually selling plans like that - pay a set amount every so often and you get access to the services overall cheaper than if you paid after a call, and when you do need them you can be sure you won't need to worry about paying them since you already do that.

You still fail to see that a single payer system is just for payment, that all healthcare providers are still carried out by private companies.

Kohalo wrote:You still fail to see that a single payer system is just for payment, that all healthcare providers are still carried out by private companies.

Okay. Why should I pay a company that I'm never going to patronize?

Kohalo wrote:Why are emergency services a guaranteed right?

Because they actually aren't. Services can never be rights. Services are privileges predicated on your ability to pay for them. A service is not a right because rights are things that are automatic because of human nature. A service is not automatic - a service needs someone else to actually provide the service. Rights cannot be provided by other people. Rights do not involve other people. If a service is a right, it's either slavery or not really a right at all, because either the service provider is forced to provide that service, or they can refuse to provide the service, therefore making it not a right.

Emergency services, and any other kind of service, are not rights. You do not have the right to healthcare.

Narland, The United States Of Patriots

Miencraft wrote:

Because they actually aren't. Services can never be rights. Services are privileges predicated on your ability to pay for them. A service is not a right because rights are things that are automatic because of human nature. A service is not automatic - a service needs someone else to actually provide the service. Rights cannot be provided by other people. Rights do not involve other people. If a service is a right, it's either slavery or not really a right at all, because either the service provider is forced to provide that service, or they can refuse to provide the service, therefore making it not a right.

Emergency services, and any other kind of service, are not rights. You do not have the right to healthcare.

There's the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, (or life, liberty and property). I believe that healthcare falls into the "right to life"

Even if it isn't a right, that's fine. It's a necessity for people to have access to it. Again, you're using semantic arguments.

Kohalo wrote:There's the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, (or life, liberty and property). I believe that healthcare falls into the "right to life"

Even if it isn't a right, that's fine. It's a necessity for people to have access to it. Again, you're using semantic arguments.

If healthcare is a right because of the right to life, then that means that diseases violate the right to life. Considering the right to life is natural and disease is also natural, that's kind of nonsense.

It's not a necessity. If you feel like you need access to healthcare, you can go pay for it. You can buy insurance. That's fine. Nobody else should be forced to pay for that, though, because healthcare being a necessity is incredibly subjective. Healthy people won't tell you they need access to healthcare. They'd probably say they'd prefer to have access just in case, but that's literally what catastrophic insurance is for, so they'd just buy a plan that has catastrophic coverage.

Sickly people will tell you they do. But they're already paying for it anyways. That's on them. It's not my job to pay for someone else's surgery. I don't care if someone outside my immediate family or anyone who isn't a close friend gets terminally ill. It's not my problem, and I shouldn't be forced to pay for it.

Narland

"That's on them"

According to a study by Harvard University, 45,000 peoole die every year due to lack of health coverage. Many of these because they can't afford it.

Countries with universal healthcare pay LESS than the United States, with 0 deaths due to lack of health coverage and a far healthier population.

Kohalo wrote:due to lack of health coverage

Do not conflate health coverage and healthcare. Health coverage is not healthcare. You can have coverage and not have access to care, because the wait at the hospital is too long, or there aren't enough doctors to deal with the demand.

Similarly, you can have access to care but not be covered - you can go to a hospital and get surgery, and pay 100% out-of-pocket because you're not insured. Coverage and care are not the same thing, so don't pretend that they are.

Narland, The United States Of Patriots

Miencraft wrote:Do not conflate health coverage and healthcare. Health coverage is not healthcare. You can have coverage and not have access to care, because the wait at the hospital is too long, or there aren't enough doctors to deal with the demand.

Similarly, you can have access to care but not be covered - you can go to a hospital and get surgery, and pay 100% out-of-pocket because you're not insured. Coverage and care are not the same thing, so don't pretend that they are.

If you read what I said, the lack of coverage made people not want to go and find care, because (guess what?) they weren't covered. The two are linked.

Everybody being covered makes it easier for people to get care.

Kohalo wrote:Everybody being covered makes it easier for people to get care.

Okay. Then everyone should go pay for their own coverage. I don't care if people die because they don't want to go to a doctor. That's not my problem.

Miencraft wrote:Okay. Then everyone should go pay for their own coverage. I don't care if people die because they don't want to go to a doctor. That's not my problem.

Everyone should pay for their own coverage, but a lot can't. It's expensive. My mother's appendix surgery cost over $100,000 for us and hurt us a lot financially. I care if people die, why wouldn't you? Another human being dying because they're afraid of how much it'll cost them to get treatment? That's just sickening.

Yeah, it's not your problem until you actually get sick. Or have to watch someone struggle to pay for their chemo treatment.

Kohalo wrote:I care if people die, why wouldn't you?

Because I don't know them. I don't care about people I don't know. They don't impact me, nor does their death. Someone related to me gets sick, I'll help support them. Someone I don't know gets sick, they can deal with that on their own.

Miencraft wrote:Because I don't know them. I don't care about people I don't know. They don't impact me, nor does their death. Someone related to me gets sick, I'll help support them. Someone I don't know gets sick, they can deal with that on their own.

That's pretty cruel. Atheist, I'm assuming?

Kohalo wrote:I care if people die, why wouldn't you? ....

This is a straw man.

You seem to be intent that the only way to solve the problems in our healthcare system is with the government. Which is just laughable. If government run healthcare is so good why do people still come from countries with government run healthcare to the US for treatment. Answer. Because not only is government controlled healthcare immoral its incredibly ineffective.

Miencraft, Pevvania, Narland, Rateria

The United States Of Patriots wrote:This is a straw man.

You seem to be intent that the only way to solve the problems in our healthcare system is with the government. Which is just laughable. If government run healthcare is so good why do people still come from countries with government run healthcare to the US for treatment. Answer. Because not only is government controlled healthcare immoral its incredibly ineffective.

That's why I support single payer, not socialized medice or nationalized healthcare

Kohalo wrote:That's pretty cruel.

Cruel? Why should I care about people I don't know? [I]I don't know them and they have no impact on my life. I'm not going to waste my time and money helping people I'll never meet and who will never be a part of my life.

Narland, Rateria, Jadentopian Order

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.