A friend of mine recently wrote in a post on FB: “The health care debate is a great example. So many fighting against health care being provided for the masses.”
I, for one, will not allow someone to dictate my own position to me…my position is that we should provide for THOSE WHO NEED IT and not for those who have no need. To do so is nothing short of wasteful and irresponsible. Yes, establish insurance for those who need it…and even establish emergency funds for those who may not know they need it until they come to a situation that threatens their life savings or home…but DON’T foist it on EVERYONE. NOT EVERYONE NEEDS IT! So let’s be done with this inane accusation that I am against healthcare for the masses when I have said that it SHOULD be provided for those who need it! I simply will not acknowledge this absurd attempt to dictate to me what my own argument is.
I do not support universal health care because it is being proposed for everyone…not just those who need it. Offer it for THOSE WHO NEED IT…is that so confusing?!?
Imagine a small town in which there are only 10 cars between all of the residents. 2 of these cars are in dire need of brakes…they’ll fail very soon…and the other 8 cars do not need brakes…in fact, the brakes on these other 8 cars range from brand new to good condition. Why in the world would this small town issue an edict that ALL 10 cars need to have new brakes put on within the next week if only 2 of the cars actually need it. And then imagine that someone raised that very question at the city council meeting—and then someone else stood up and said that they are against putting new brakes on *all* the cars…WRONG! This first person stood up to say that they are absolutely in agreement with putting new brakes on the 2 cars in need of brakes, but that they are against forcing new brakes on the cars that do not need the new brakes. To claim that the first person is against all new brakes is laughable at best, and a bald-faced lie at worst, plain and simple.
In a similar manner, I simply will not accept those on the other side of the healthcare issue who choose to paint me as someone who opposes healthcare for the masses…I do not! I do, however, oppose healthcare proscribed for those who don’t need it, but by all means, find a way to provide for those who do need it!
If you remember, this same tactic was employed in the stem cell research debate as well. I as well as many others do not support embryonic stem cell research but we DO support the other 3 types of stem cell research…and yet, we’ve been accused of not supporting stem cell research full stop. Since when is someone who supports a medical initiative 75% of the time considered to be against that medical initiative? In a word—ridiculous!
I’m tired of being told what I believe…ESPECIALLY when it doesn’t square with what I actually do believe. So, for those of you who want to TRY to paint me into a corner philosophically in a way that does not agree with my stated views, I reject you out of hand! Let’s have a debate on the issues rather than simply devolve into name calling, unsupported sweeping generalizations, and character assassination. I welcome any and all intelligent debate, but let’s leave the name calling and unsubstantiated accusations back in the 3rd grade where they belong…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Also a tactic employed by the media to turn the tide of public opinion...witness the broad brush and characterization of opponents of universal health care as somehow being absurd, unintelligent, anti-progress, fools who should get out of the way and let the enlightened people work to save civilization. Unbelievable.
ReplyDeleteGood post, Scott. As to your question...yes, it either must be confusing, or they are being very disengenuous about their real reasons for wanting health care reform across the board.
ReplyDelete