THE RIGHT FOR MEDICAL CARE VS. THE RIGHT TO HAVE IT PAID BY ME

August 27, 2009

Those defending government run health care espouse that "Health Care is a Right".  I suppose there is a dichotomy, so to speak, when looking at such a simple statement. 

The opposing positions created by such a statement are: does a person have the right to seek medical care vs. does the person have a right to expect the federal government to pay for medical care.  I fully support the former while a vehemently oppose the latter.  We all have natural rights endowed upon us by our Creator.  Our republican government was created with the simple idea of self-governance and that the federal government would be granted sufficient powers to ensure our rights to life, liberty, and property without coercion from the government or others. 

Simply, as part of our natural rights to life and liberty we all have the absolute right to seek medical care.  Whether you can pay for that care, must pay out of pocket, or have some form of health insurance is irrelevant to whether you can seek medical care.  You chose based on your situation, needs, and other factors to seek Medicare care or not. This is truly a right.  This is what having liberty means.  The right to make your own choices without coercion by the government or other individuals.

Conversely, who pays for your medical care is a different question and has nothing to do with rights.  Numerous scenarios surround an individuals personal situation in regard to paying for medical care. Rich or poor; in good health or bad; have some form of insurance or not; or have other priorities in your life, etc. you must decide how to best pay for medical care. 

Ultimately, the solution presented by statists is the federal government is uniquely positioned to establish, implement, and execute a health care program for all people, including illegal immigrants, without regard to any other factors.  Simply stated this is collectivism.  The federal government believes the nation state collectively is more important than the sum of its parts, the individual.  Collectively, a handful of elected officials assume all-knowing powers related to the nation's needs, determine they can solve the "how do I pay for medical care" problem, and portray them to society as compassion for the needy/uninsured. 

I rebuke such an arrogant, presumptuous ideology by those in power.  First, compassion is an individual thing, not a collective thing, and is only virtuous when voluntary.  Compelling society through taxation and other methods of redistribution of wealth to pay for their ideology is tyranny.  On the other hand, as a Christian I believe I have a duty to assist those in need, and encourage all people to support those charities, groups, or causes in ways you determine best (without coercion by the government).

Second, the health care bill specifically states the federal government  will tax those individuals that are most able to pay and give to those individuals that are most needy.  Anyone that understands Marxism understands the meaning of the federal governments intentions; from those according to their ability, to those according to their need. 

Third, anyone on a committee, board, organization, etc. that interjects themselves between an individual and their medical care provider, under the auspices of knowing the best course of action for the individual, confers powers upon themselves to impact both liberty and life.  Liberty is impacted by the ability to freely choose your course without coercion by the government, and life is impacted as yours may be of lesser quality or shorter duration depending upon a third party decision. 

Fourth, I believe this violates the Constitution in three ways.  Nowhere under Article I Section 8 have these powers been conveyed to the Congress by the people.  By virtue of this, it also violates the 10th amendment as this is a State issue not a federal issue.  Lastly, the bill states the federal government has the power to access all your medical records and have direct access to bank accounts to assess your ability to pay and to facilitate electronic funds transfers.  This is a direct violation of the 4th Amendment. 

Fifth, the Statist creates a dependency state between the federal government and those receiving government imposed benefits.  The dependency creates a vicious cycle where the beneficiary continually votes the Statist into power to receive their ill-believed "right" to something.  It's an addiction more powerful than drugs.  The side effects include low self-esteem, a guaranteed lifetime in mediocrity, a dependence upon others for basic needs, and certainly no hope for anything better than the status quo.  The vicious cycle continues onward as those that profess to be providing for you are restraining you with the shackles of bondage. 

So, when someone says to you "Health Care is a Right" feel free to explain why it is a right to seek medical care, and why its not a right to expect the federal government to provide and pay for it.

We believe that the Constitution of the United States speaks for itself. There is no need to rewrite, change or reinterpret it to suit the fancies of special interest groups or protected classes.