Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 Socialism
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  12:36:09  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Do you want it or not?

Many Americans think they understand the laws and the Constitution, however, they want to socialize medicine or make it a nationalized, state plan. Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution lists the powers of Congress, none of which pertains to controlling the health care of citizens.
To lawfully change the Constitution to add this power to Congress a Constitutional Amendment must be made, requiring 2/3rds of Congress and ratification of 3/4ths of the states. A simple act of Congress to initiate such a plan is unconstitutional.

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26007 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  12:42:39   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Who is attempting to initiate a plan for Congress to control the health care of the citizens, Doomar?

Are you going to next claim that said plan mandates sex-change operations or will refuse care to the "worthless?"

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1884 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  12:52:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Do you want it or not?

To lawfully change the Constitution to add this power to Congress a Constitutional Amendment must be made, requiring 2/3rds of Congress and ratification of 3/4ths of the states. A simple act of Congress to initiate such a plan is unconstitutional.
I don't recall medicare requiring a constitutional amendment. Should we suspend all coverage until we have one? Or are you just here to parrot soundbytes from the fringe?

edit: make that recall

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Edited by - moakley on 08/12/2009 12:53:59
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  12:54:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think you know the answer, Dave. But should you not be questioning why the Congress and the President will not fall under this health care plan or be subject to it?
Have you read your Constitution and can you respond to the actual statement or should I include a picture of a straw man with every "Dave W." post?

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  12:55:32   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I want national, mandatory government run health care, yessir I do! I can't imagine the government doing a worse job of providing effective health care insurance than is being committed by the rotten HMOs right now.

You're just flat wrong about such a program being unconstitutional. The subject matter of Federal laws don't have to be specified in the Constitution in advance for them to be legal. (Do you think the National Park Service is unconstitutional?)

National health care is not socialism, though such plans are often promoted by socialists. Obama's plan (and the variants being discussed) are social insurance plans. And even if it were socialism, that would only speak well of socialism.

Socialism is government ownership and control of the industrial means of production. A national health insurance program doesn't come close, in itself, to being socialism. Misrepresentations of "socialism" and general name-calling are the heart of the tactics being used by the insurance industry to derail a long-needed system to repair a failed US health care system that is wastefully administered, outrageously expensive, and leaves millions to suffer and die. Yes, America has a health system second to none -- if you are rich. But if you have no insurance, or if your insurance doesn't cover your illness, you are doomed.

It's long past time that the USA caught up to the world class health systems in modern all industrial nations.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 08/12/2009 13:04:00
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:00:25   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by moakley

Originally posted by Doomar

I don't recall medicare requiring a constitutional amendment. Should we suspend all coverage until we have one? Or are you just here to parrot soundbytes from the fringe?
edit: make that recall


Moakley, a good observation. The very reason why Medicare and Caid were both done passed unconstitutionally. (Many other laws fit in the same category, but I digress.) When the states are involved in voting for Constitutional Amendments, the likelihood of bad laws passing becomes much slimmer. Medicare and Caid are both programs in need of reform and are in many ways responsible for added health care costs to all.

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:06:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Socialism is a progressive move away from individual control and responsibility to government control. This has been happening for many years in the U.S. contrary to our laws. We are a Republic with specific duties and responsibilities given to our representatives and leaders as noted in Art.1 Sec. 8. All other powers are reserved to the States and the people.

Be honest with yourself. Progression toward socialism...i.e. more government control of industry, is what I am referring to. Will we be a full blown socialist state by a single act of Congress...no way. Will it bring us closer to that goal of socialists? Yes. Are you a socialist or a believer in a republican form of government?

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:08:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Moakley, a good observation. The very reason why Medicare and Caid were both done passed unconstitutionally. (Many other laws fit in the same category, but I digress.) When the states are involved in voting for Constitutional Amendments, the likelihood of bad laws passing becomes much slimmer. Medicare and Caid are both programs in need of reform and are in many ways responsible for added health care costs to all.
Essentially, any law is constitutional if the Supreme Court has not ruled it unconstitutional. Your opinion, or mine, have no bearing upon this fact. Cite the Supreme Court case(s) in which Medicare or Medicaid have been ruled unconstitutional. If you can't, then you just have a layman's opinion, like I do.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:14:15   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Socialism is a progressive move away from individual control and responsibility to government control. This has been happening for many years in the U.S. contrary to our laws. We are a Republic with specific duties and responsibilities given to our representatives and leaders as noted in Art.1 Sec. 8. All other powers are reserved to the States and the people.

Be honest with yourself. Progression toward socialism...i.e. more government control of industry, is what I am referring to. Will we be a full blown socialist state by a single act of Congress...no way. Will it bring us closer to that goal of socialists? Yes. Are you a socialist or a believer in a republican form of government?
I'm a believer in a democratic republic.

Again, national health care is not socialism, though I do not think that term is a dirty word. Throwing out that word is used to incite and confuse the ignorant, the greedy, the short-sighted, and the reactionary. That's a strategy that has been used too much in recent years. But this time, I think, it's a losing strategy.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1884 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:16:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Moakley, a good observation. The very reason why Medicare and Caid were both done passed unconstitutionally. (Many other laws fit in the same category, but I digress.) When the states are involved in voting for Constitutional Amendments, the likelihood of bad laws passing becomes much slimmer. Medicare and Caid are both programs in need of reform and are in many ways responsible for added health care costs to all.
How is medicare coverage unconstitutional? What have constitutional lawyers missed that you haven't? If Medicare is unconstitutional would you suspend coverage until we can have it properly ratified by the states? Are you writing/calling your representative requesting that they suspend coverage? In what way has medicare added to the overall cost of health care?

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:30:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Constitutional or otherwise, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are all social insurance programs. Do you consider Social Security to be "socialist," Doomar?

I note that you seem to equate "socialist" with "evil." Would/do you bravely refuse to accept any Social Security income?

(For the record, I would be, at best, starving and living on the street were it not for Social Security. And I know I'm not alone.)


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  13:58:55   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by HalfMooner

Constitutional or otherwise, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are all social insurance programs. Do you consider Social Security to be "socialist," Doomar?

I note that you seem to equate "socialist" with "evil." Would/do you bravely refuse to accept any Social Security income?

(For the record, I would be, at best, starving and living on the street were it not for Social Security. And I know I'm not alone.)


You are certainly not and if it were not for being in the VA system since the '70s, I wouldn't have lived on the streets for very long. I would like to see everyone have at least some semblance of what I have.

It ain't socialism, it's compassion and the insuranse industry be damned.




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Edited by - filthy on 08/12/2009 14:00:10
Go to Top of Page

Simon
SFN Regular

USA
1992 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  14:02:20   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Simon a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Socialism is a progressive move away from individual control and responsibility to government control. This has been happening for many years in the U.S. contrary to our laws. We are a Republic with specific duties and responsibilities given to our representatives and leaders as noted in Art.1 Sec. 8. All other powers are reserved to the States and the people.



Hum?

Socialism refers to various theories of economic organization advocating state, public or common worker ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal access to resources for all individuals with a more egalitarian method of compensation



There; glad I could help.

Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996
Edited by - Simon on 08/12/2009 14:02:58
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26007 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  14:32:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

I think you know the answer, Dave.
Yeah, and the answer is "nobody." But don't let that stop you.
But should you not be questioning why the Congress and the President will not fall under this health care plan or be subject to it?
No, I already know why.
Have you read your Constitution and can you respond to the actual statement...
The statement includes an unwritten and unsupported premise. Why should I respond to the logic which follows it before that premise is supported with facts? Without support, your argument is unsound from the start.
...or should I include a picture of a straw man with every "Dave W." post?
Ah, a personal attack already? For shame, Doomar.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26007 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  18:01:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Doomar

Article 1, Section 8 of our Constitution lists the powers of Congress... A simple act of Congress to initiate such a plan is unconstitutional.
Wow, this argument is growing on me. The Constitution says nothing about a whole boatload of things the government does anyway. For example, Congressional Chaplains, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the US Motto aren't mentioned in the Constitution at all, so they all must be unconstitutional and we should do away with them and oust all elected officials who favor their continuance without amending the Constitution!

"Get rid of it or amend!" should be our new slogan (abbreviated GROIOA). The Smithsonian? GROIOA! The White House? GROIOA! The flag? GROIOA!!! Honestly, the US government has no business dictating what should be flown as the flag of our country, as evidenced by the fact that "shall create and regulate a national flag" is found nowhere in the Constitution or any of its Amendments, so is not a power granted to any of the three branches. Obviously, the power to invent a flag and set rules for its use are reserved to the Several States, and the Feds shouldn't be mucking around with it at all.

Obviously, as soon as we reject every last penny spent on Federal-level items which aren't constitutional, the government will have plenty of money with which to pay down the debt incurred by all the unconstitutional jack-offs who preceeded whoever's going to be next. And once the debt is paid down to zero (in a dozen years or so), I suppose the government will just have to find a way to maintain a huge pile of cash, since there's nothing in the Constitution about lowering taxes. Perhaps Congress will tackle that oversight next, if they've got a building in which to meet, on their own dime.

Much less fun is this pile of dreck:
Will we be a full blown socialist state by a single act of Congress...no way. Will it bring us closer to that goal of socialists? Yes. Are you a socialist or a believer in a republican form of government?
Translation: no single law will turn the U.S.A. into a socialist state, but if you support even a single Federal law which promotes the general welfare, then you're a socialist. It's ludicrous in its self-contradiction.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 08/12/2009 :  21:52:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by Moakley

Originally posted by Doomar
Essentially, any law is constitutional if the Supreme Court has not ruled it unconstitutional. Your opinion, or mine, have no bearing upon this fact. Cite the Supreme Court case(s) in which Medicare or Medicaid have been ruled unconstitutional. If you can't, then you just have a layman's opinion, like I do.


Why is it, Moakley, that you or I are thought to be unable to interpret our own Constitution? Do you think yourself incapable? Are these men more than men who cannot make great mistakes? The Supremes have their own agendas and wish to mold this country into their own image by reinterpreting the Constitution and changing the "original intent" of the laws and boundaries. I do not need six men/women to tell me what my Constitution means. It isn't that difficult to figure out, especially if you study the writings and lives of the founding fathers who wrote it. There is also much precedence in these matters purposely overlooked by the Court.

This "skeptics" forum resembles the mind set of these justices. They have a majority opinion indoctrinated in a type of thinking spoon fed to them in laws schools that is contrary to the mindset taught to the writers of the Constitution. The majority of justices spews out this mindset and expects the masses to follow their precepts. Most of you in this forum walk in goose step to their commands, like mindless zombies (no offense intended, please). I encourage you to shake off the lethargy in your minds and study the founding fathers and their writings in context, not just what some author wrote about them. You'll discover truths about our law that are now hidden from your eyes.

Wake up folks and become true skeptics...seek for truth.

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Edited by - Doomar on 08/12/2009 21:55:34
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.81 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000