M
Mitspa
Guest
Lets see..Bernie believes in the unending and unrestricted murder of innocent babies..but because he gives away other peoples money...he is a good guy? No!
Lets see..Bernie believes in the unending and unrestricted murder of innocent babies..but because he gives away other peoples money...he is a good guy? No!
So you don't need to worry if you can afford your diabetes medication or heart medication and cancer and AIDS patients don't have to choose death over proper care. THAT is what christianity is about!
Kisses, we already had that. The laws we've had in place for many, many years are such that you could receive all of the healthcare you needed. You couldn't get cosmetic surgery, but if your health or life were threatened, then hospitals couldn't refuse to give you medical care. They can't charge you interest on your bills either. You can already receive as much healthcare as you need. The problem is paying for it. But if you're able to receive it, what's the problem? The only problem is debt. And that's not life-threatening. In fact it's not even house-threatening or property-threatening. You set up a payment plan (free of interest) to pay the care provider a set amount each month depending on your income. That's a very merciful system in my opinion.
This "Affordable Care Act" has little to do with making healthcare better available. Why? Because healthcare has always been available - even if you could't afford it. And let's not overlook the fact that the federal government can't lawfully force you to buy a product, so the Affordable Care Act had to be passed as a tax. Otherwise it couldn't legally be made a law. So I ask you: how does a tax make healthcare more affordable? Something fishy is going on. The way it functions is: if you don't buy a product, then the government charges you a fee. Sounds a little like the federal government is trying to force you into buying a product, right? That's illegal.
Sure, we didn't have a great system before. Sure, it had abuses and problems. But it worked. Healthcare was available. People could get it. Making healthcare more available so people don't die from a lack of healthcare was never the issue then. So what were liberals crying about?
Kisses, we already had that. The laws we've had in place for many, many years are such that you could receive all of the healthcare you needed. You couldn't get cosmetic surgery, but if your health or life were threatened, then hospitals couldn't refuse to give you medical care. They can't charge you interest on your bills either. You can already receive as much healthcare as you need. The problem is paying for it. But if you're able to receive it, what's the problem? The only problem is debt. And that's not life-threatening. In fact it's not even house-threatening or property-threatening. You set up a payment plan (free of interest) to pay the care provider a set amount each month depending on your income. That's a very merciful system in my opinion.
This "Affordable Care Act" has little to do with making healthcare better available. Why? Because healthcare has always been available - even if you could't afford it. And let's not overlook the fact that the federal government can't lawfully force you to buy a product, so the Affordable Care Act had to be passed as a tax. Otherwise it couldn't legally be made a law. So I ask you: how does a tax make healthcare more affordable? Something fishy is going on. The way it functions is: if you don't buy a product, then the government charges you a fee. Sounds a little like the federal government is trying to force you into buying a product, right? That's illegal.
Sure, we didn't have a great system before. Sure, it had abuses and problems. But it worked. Healthcare was available. People could get it. Making healthcare more available so people don't die from a lack of healthcare was never the issue then. So what were liberals crying about?
That right there is the socialist's mating call.But it is socialism. And it sure would be fun, just as long as my tax bracket wasn't the one that was increased.
Bernie is a good communist. He likes to associate his political ideology with that of murderous historical people. Bernie is brave with putting his name alongside the murderers of tens of million of people. Go Bernie....you the man.
Kisses, we already had that. The laws we've had in place for many, many years are such that you could receive all of the healthcare you needed. You couldn't get cosmetic surgery, but if your health or life were threatened, then hospitals couldn't refuse to give you medical care. They can't charge you interest on your bills either. You can already receive as much healthcare as you need. The problem is paying for it. But if you're able to receive it, what's the problem? The only problem is debt. And that's not life-threatening. In fact it's not even house-threatening or property-threatening. You set up a payment plan (free of interest) to pay the care provider a set amount each month depending on your income. That's a very merciful system in my opinion.
This "Affordable Care Act" has little to do with making healthcare better available. Why? Because healthcare has always been available - even if you could't afford it. And let's not overlook the fact that the federal government can't lawfully force you to buy a product, so the Affordable Care Act had to be passed as a tax. Otherwise it couldn't legally be made a law. So I ask you: how does a tax make healthcare more affordable? Something fishy is going on. The way it functions is: if you don't buy a product, then the government charges you a fee. Sounds a little like the federal government is trying to force you into buying a product, right? That's illegal.
Sure, we didn't have a great system before. Sure, it had abuses and problems. But it worked. Healthcare was available. People could get it. Making healthcare more available so people don't die from a lack of healthcare was never the issue then. So what were liberals crying about?
Lets see..Bernie believes in the unending and unrestricted murder of innocent babies..but because he gives away other peoples money...he is a good guy? No!
As I've argued, it's NOT murder, or at least not to the same extent as murdering something else, and there are times where abortion is the more moral and lesser of two evils. Are you vegan? Do you support murdering animals? Did you know that pigs and cows are far more sentient than fetuses or zygotes and they have higher pain receptors and actual have social bonds and memories.... By comparison, it's less moral to kill an animal than it is ending the growth of a zygote.
If you're going to kill a human being, you better have a really good reason to do so. And saving the life of another human being is the only morally satisfying reason for me.
I don't want to jump all over you today. I apologize if it's starting to seem that way. So I'll just state my beliefs on abortion (and this is fast getting off the track of this thread, I know):
A zygote may not be a person, because the word person carries with it cultural implications. And a zygote/fetus is not the mother's body either. In fact the zygote/fetus has to be protected from the mother's immune system, because the mother's body recognizes it as a foreign creature growing inside the mother. Is this creature a chicken? No. Is it a pig? No. This being - that is separate from the mother's being - is human. So the question is not one of species but of maturity. It is a creature. It is a human. It is a human being that is in the process of maturing (much like a baby; much like a child). And killing it - whether or not you could define it as murder - could be literally defined as killing a human being. And that's why I will never be pro-choice except in the case of saving the mother's life. If you're going to kill a human being, you better have a really good reason to do so. And saving the life of another human being is the only morally satisfying reason for me.
Moot argument. Champion abortionists don't care about anyone's life but their own and those whom they can control with their paternalist manipulation.
I care about all life. I go out of my way not to even step on insects. It is because I care that I support abortion, especially in certain circumstances. I even made the comparison with zygotes and full grown pigs with memories, emotions, and pain receptors. They are more sentient than the zygote or the fetus in comparison. And I'm working hard to become a full vegan because of the fact that I care about other lives, not just my own. I wouldn't care about being vegan if I just cared about me.
Hope you didn't think I was jumping all over you either. It's human gene material, yes. It will turn into a fully developed human if allowed to continue growing. But it doesn't have a heart beat, a brain, or anything...(depending on the week of abortion) it's not sentient. Since it's not sentient, and pigs are, at this stage, if you were to kill anything, the zygote would be more moral to kill than the pig. (I personally don't like the idea of killing anything, unless absolutely necessary or for survival, etc...) So, comparing the stages, pigs have more feelings, can feel pain and emotion, they are smarter than dogs, they can learn, they can suffer. A zygote can't do any of that. I can't see that as a "murder" any more than it's murder to drive your car and you hit a bug and it splats on your windshield.
Now, I think it's irresponsible for women to just go and use abortion as a sort of birth control technique. There are far better ways to avoid getting pregnant and other methods of contraception. But, I won't fault them for getting an abortion either. This planet is FAR too over populated and it's getting dangerous. I'll still think shes irresponsible, but she is the one in control, and if she decides to get an abortion, the earlier the better.
I'm not sure if you ever responded the other day to my moral scenario where you can tell throughout the pregnancy (and this hypothetical situation is a case where the parents actually really want to keep the kid, let's presume) so you can tell that the kid is missing something important and it will absolutely die and suffer in a matter of minutes or hours post birth. In this sad and horrible circumstance, even the parents that REALLY wanted to keep their baby....they should abort. It is irresponsible to keep it with these circumstances. All they are doing is causing harm to the baby and themselves. The faster they can end this pregnancy and move on with their lives and try again to have a baby, the better. No need to put themselves through this horrible situation, nor the baby.
Lets see..Bernie believes in the unending and unrestricted murder of innocent babies..
This is some of the most disgusting thought I have ever read on this forum..comparing little human babies to pigs ..this is the ideology that allowed Hitler to kills jews and other humans because they where equated to animals ... No real Christian would have this attitudeI care about all life. I go out of my way not to even step on insects. It is because I care that I support abortion, especially in certain circumstances. I even made the comparison with zygotes and full grown pigs with memories, emotions, and pain receptors. They are more sentient than the zygote or the fetus in comparison. And I'm working hard to become a full vegan because of the fact that I care about other lives, not just my own. I wouldn't care about being vegan if I just cared about me.
Think of all the money that's saved by murdering babies.
And what's really cool is that all the money saved can go into . . . murdering more babies.
he gives away other peoples money...he is a good guy? No!