Does National Health Equal Socialism?
John A. Quayle
blueoval at SGI.NET
Sun Jan 30 12:16:06 MST 2000
At 01:28 AM 1/30/00 -0600, Richard A Whitenight wrote:
>As it stands now, health programs vary from state to state, but > the
Democrats appear to be paying a lot of attention on a > national health
care program for those who can't afford health > care, with a great
emphasis on old, older and oldest.
> Occasionally when questioned, the candidates say their for
> the single mother who can't afford to provide her child a
> decent medical program. Humans are the only individuals
> who seem to want to look out for those who are not as well off.
Not really, but they are the only specie doing so in a misguided fashion.
In the animal world, the older ones are savy and teach the younger ones all
the ropes. Teaching another how to function to achieve success is the
single *BEST* "help" there can ever be.
Let me quote from a posting of mine off a Catholic chatlist, arguing
conservatism with someone who openly endorsed "social spending":
>Sure, the conservative philosophy places an emphasis > on individual
effort. However, please note that it also > acknowledges the substantial
importance of God's grace in > our lives. Recall that Jesus spoke of effort
and aid in the > Bible. "Give a man a fish and you've fed him a meal. Teach
> him how to fish, and you've fed him for a lifetime."
> The ability and desire to be self-supporting and function > independantly
does not make one an isolationist. It simply > gives people more tools with
which to tackle life's challenges. > The saddest sight in the world is the
housewife and mother, > who loses her breadwinner (through some catastrophic
> occurance) and not be able to carry on with her life and
> raising of her children.
Whether we're talking domestic social spending, or foreign aid, the *BEST*
way to provide is to *TEACH*. And, BTW, "social justice" is a term coined
by Karl Marx.
For The Hoi Poloi, (Pam, did I spell this right?)
More information about the Rushtalk