“Of course not – next question”
The question that Pravada on the Merrimack asked was this:
Question of the week: Do you believe health care is a basic human right?
No – it’s a mere entitlement in which some politicians decide that a bunch of taxpayers have to pay the bill for others and in the case of the Democrat Primary, a vehicle with which to pander for votes from those that never got taught the difference. Simple, right? It should be this simple, but it isn’t. Why? Easy to see and to know what this even exists as a question.
Unfortunately, our public / Government school education pretty much sucks badly. If I went into any high school and started asking this question, or over to the nearest Tanger Outlet and asked “What is the difference between a Right, an Obligation, and an Entitlement?”, what kind of looks would I get back in return? I’m easy to bet on deer in headlights and utter confusion.
If government schools DID do their job, that question, and this conversation sparked by the Monitor’s question, would never exist and nor would a whole range issues be getting any political airtime based on “it’s a Right!”. Let’s get it started with “Did the Founders ever talk about healthcare as a Right” Or free housing? Or free food?”. And if so, why wasn’t it (to return to just the Healthcare question) put into Bill of Rights?”. It wasn’t because it isn’t one. EVAH. And nor should it be considered as such. Why?
The problem is that the word, Right, has been bastardized to mean that pretty much any activist or politician can yell or kvetch that “This ought to be a Right!” and many will go “er, why not?”.
The problem is that a Right, a TRUE Right, is standalone. It exists, for each person, and for each person alone, simply by dint of being human. The Right to Free Speech, the Right to self-defense, the Right to Freedom of Expression and others – all belong to me as a set of Rights. You, too, even though my set of Rights cannot be co-mingled with yours and neither can I lend one of my Rights to anyone else. They are innate to the experience of being born and living as an American Citizen (that they should be considered Rights for anyone is the topic of another post at some point but I think you’d know what I’d say). The Founders knew, from their philosophical studies informed by Locke, Montesquieu, and others AND based on their Judeo-Christian beliefs along with the radical idea that each man is sovereign, that Rights pre-existed Government via God and Nature’s God. Government is formed to protect those Rights but not to enumerate new Rights out of thin air (unless you are a Socialist of the Hobbes persuasion in that Government can grant and withdraw Rights to people at any time based on ITS needs and wants).
And a Right, again, is standalone. For example, my Right to Free Speech is just….there. I don’t have to apply for it. I don’t have to study anything in order to use it (unless I wish to get better at it) and I don’t need to get licensed for it. In fact, it is a Negative Right – the Bill of Rights enumerates it as something that Government CANNOT do anything to me for exercising it. It is a Negative Right in that it is a prohibition on Government to back off and cannot stop speech simply because it is not liked.
Funny thing, though – even though I have the right to speak, no one has to listen to me. Not one person. Not even via the Right of Association (or its converse, the Right to NOT associate). No, my RIGHT does not obligate anyone to listen or argue back. They can if they want – and I couldn’t stop them out in the Public Square but they need not supply me with anything, along with being a foil for my debate. That’s how a Right works – it is individually available but of no “right” to have others having to take part in it. Think of the other Rights in the Bill of Rights – they all act in the same manner. I exercise them completely separate from your exercising your’s.
But the Concord Monitor goes along with the fooferall of making the nuance of “Of COURSE Healthcare is a Right” and as a “paper of records”, shows its ignorance at the same time.
Sidenote: is it really ignorance? Or willful stupidity stemming ideological rose-colored glasses? Is it pressing its thumb on its philosophical scale?
They purposefully ignore the difference between a Right without Obligation and a government Entitlement. Shame on them for whatever reason it truly is. Instead, they are trying to introduce the non-Constitutional idea that a Right must be paid for by others.
And this will make the Progressive heads explode: we all know what that is called when others must involuntarily be forced to give of their time and talent to others, right?
***********
The Concord Monitor Question:
THE CONCEPT OF “MEDICARE FOR ALL” has in large part defined the 2020 Democratic primary. Each candidate has been compelled to state where they stand on the issue and then pressed to defend themselves. Supporters must answer for the elephant in the room – How are you going to pay for it? – and opponents must offer something that greatly improves the current system or risk being labeled a “status quo” candidate. As with all complex problems, no answer will be satisfactory for everybody, and we certainly don’t know how to solve the puzzle. But we are intrigued by the philosophical nature of the debate. For our question of the week, we want to know one simple thing, regardless of whether you are a Democrat, Republican, independent or other: Do you believe health care should be considered a basic human right? Email your response by noon on Tuesday, Nov. 12, to letters@cmonitor.com. Please keep it between 150 and 400 words, and include an address and phone number for verification. We’ll run a selection in next Thursday’s Forum section.
(H/T: Concord Monitor)
