Guns and Healthcare
65- Right2BeHeard
- 2 posts
- Joined: 2 months ago
- Hubs: 1
- Fans: 1
Why is it that republicans think that it's our right as Americans to have the right to own a gun but healthcare is a privilege? Do I have any less of a right to live a healthy life because I work for a company that doesn't offer health insurance. I guess if I had a gun though I could kill off the H1N1 before it makes me sick.
87- Madame X
- 1551 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 18
- Fans: 152
Right2BeHeard wrote:
Why is it that republicans think that it's our right as Americans to have the right to own a gun but healthcare is a privilege?
A lot of democrats think so too, mainly because they understand and follow the law of the land, the Constitution, which states in the Second Amendment our right to own a gun. No where does it state that the government must provide healthcare.
91- Jonathan Janco
- 361 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 13
- Fans: 32
Of course, the Consitution is not a vaccum, it is a living thing created and modified by many different human hands. The right to own slaves was also once in the Constitution, so was the barring of the alcohol trade. Also, it doesn't say you have the right ot own a gun, it says you have the right to 'bear arms'. So, constitutionally speaking, you could buy a nuclear warhead and prop it up in your backyard and say, "I'm just exercizing my right to bear arms". That doesn't mean the gov't won't come and take it away from you. And as well they should.
- 87
- Madame X
- 1551 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 18
- Fans: 152
Jonathan Janco wrote:
Of course, the Consitution is not a vaccum, it is a living thing created and modified by many different human hands. The right to own slaves was also once in the Constitution, so was the barring of the alcohol trade. Also, it doesn't say you have the right ot own a gun, it says you have the right to 'bear arms'. So, constitutionally speaking, you could buy a nuclear warhead and prop it up in your backyard and say, "I'm just exercizing my right to bear arms". That doesn't mean the gov't won't come and take it away from you. And as well they should.
While the Constitution can be modified by amendment, is not a "living thing". It is a statement of inalienable rights that one is born with and cannot be taken away by any form of government, no matter how tyrannical. The rights one is born with do not change from century to century.
It never stated that anyone had "the right to own slaves", but did state that one had the right to own property. At the time, that definition was construed by some to mean other human beings, but it was never in the Constitution.
And yes, it does state that you have the right to "keep" and bear arms. And yes, you do have the right to own a nuclear warhead under the 2nd Amendment. But no sane person would want to. - 91
- Jonathan Janco
- 361 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 13
- Fans: 32
Madame X wrote:
Jonathan Janco wrote:
Of course, the Consitution is not a vaccum, it is a living thing created and modified by many different human hands. The right to own slaves was also once in the Constitution, so was the barring of the alcohol trade. Also, it doesn't say you have the right ot own a gun, it says you have the right to 'bear arms'. So, constitutionally speaking, you could buy a nuclear warhead and prop it up in your backyard and say, "I'm just exercizing my right to bear arms". That doesn't mean the gov't won't come and take it away from you. And as well they should.
While the Constitution can be modified by amendment, is not a "living thing". It is a statement of inalienable rights that one is born with and cannot be taken away by any form of government, no matter how tyrannical. The rights one is born with do not change from century to century.
It never stated that anyone had "the right to own slaves", but did state that one had the right to own property. At the time, that definition was construed by some to mean other human beings, but it was never in the Constitution.
And yes, it does state that you have the right to "keep" and bear arms. And yes, you do have the right to own a nuclear warhead under the 2nd Amendment. But no sane person would want to.Sane people, yes. But not everyone is sane.
- 87
- Madame X
- 1551 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 18
- Fans: 152
Jonathan Janco wrote:
Sane people, yes. But not everyone is sane.
Then those are the people that law enforcement goes after - but you don't punish everyone with the loss of a basic right because of a few loonies.
84- PeterBoston
- 18 posts
- Joined: 5 weeks ago
- Hubs: 28
- Fans: 7
I will second the comment that the Constitution is not a living thing. The form of government/society created by the Constitution was unique in human history. The source of "American Exceptionalism" which is a term widely misused today.
Once you accept that the Constitution is a living thing that could be fundamentally changed at will by the majority, the Government or the Courts then you will have forfeited your right to personal liberty and will live no better than what your "masters" determine that you should.
It is unfortunate that so many in Washington DC have little regard for either the Constitution or the way of life it was designed to protect.
93- Scott.Life
- 1089 posts
- Joined: 3 months ago
- Hubs: 30
- Fans: 226
Madame X wrote:
Jonathan Janco wrote:
Sane people, yes. But not everyone is sane.
Then those are the people that law enforcement goes after - but you don't punish everyone with the loss of a basic right because of a few loonies.
That's exactly what we do here in America.
71- sneakorocksolid
- 2513 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 17
- Fans: 101
I've had guns all my life and enjoy target shooting and hunting. I'm not a fan of para-military style weapons but my hunting rifle packs more punch and is deadly farther than most para-military weapons anyway. So most arguements against guns seem silly and regulating law abiding citizens is miles from where the problem is.
Now what guns have to do healthcare is way beyond me but , I'm pretty simple so I may not get it. The healthcare issue is about whats fair, one side believes that all hard working Americans should have reasonable access to good healthcare. The other side want us to provide healthcare for illegals, pay for abortions, pay for people who've never worked a day in their lives and bill it all to the stooges that work. Because it's easier to regulate the honest law abiding citizens.- 87
- Madame X
- 1551 posts
- Joined: 6 months ago
- Hubs: 18
- Fans: 152
According to Pelosi, one reason her healthcare bill is so great is because it requires some of us to pick up the slack for those who refuse to.
This Vermont bill just does the same thing in another area.
http://www.resistnet.com/profiles/blogs … ter-nongun
91- Jeffrey Neal
- 377 posts
- Joined: 2 months ago
- Hubs: 23
- Fans: 93
When you start paying to subsidize my gun buying, I'll be more than happy to pay to subsidize your healthcare.
And to answer your question: your right is only limited by your means to purchase insurance or pay for medical procedures, sort of like how I can't afford to purchase a machine gun, but it's my right...right?
88- Ron Montgomery
- 2954 posts
- Joined: 7 months ago
- Hubs: 16
- Fans: 143
- 91
- Jeffrey Neal
- 377 posts
- Joined: 2 months ago
- Hubs: 23
- Fans: 93
Ron Montgomery wrote:
Just the reaction I was hoping for. - 88
- Ron Montgomery
- 2954 posts
- Joined: 7 months ago
- Hubs: 16
- Fans: 143
Madame X wrote:
Jonathan Janco wrote:
Of course, the Consitution is not a vaccum, it is a living thing created and modified by many different human hands. The right to own slaves was also once in the Constitution, so was the barring of the alcohol trade. Also, it doesn't say you have the right ot own a gun, it says you have the right to 'bear arms'. So, constitutionally speaking, you could buy a nuclear warhead and prop it up in your backyard and say, "I'm just exercizing my right to bear arms". That doesn't mean the gov't won't come and take it away from you. And as well they should.
While the Constitution can be modified by amendment, is not a "living thing". It is a statement of inalienable rights that one is born with and cannot be taken away by any form of government, no matter how tyrannical. The rights one is born with do not change from century to century.
It never stated that anyone had "the right to own slaves", but did state that one had the right to own property. At the time, that definition was construed by some to mean other human beings, but it was never in the Constitution.
And yes, it does state that you have the right to "keep" and bear arms. And yes, you do have the right to own a nuclear warhead under the 2nd Amendment. But no sane person would want to.It gets funnier everytime you say it.
sneakorocksolid wrote:
The other side want us to provide healthcare for illegals, pay for abortions, pay for people who've never worked a day in their lives and bill it all to the stooges that work. Because it's easier to regulate the honest law abiding citizens.
Clearly everyone who is for the new healthcare bill wants this.
We need to keep those cancer-suffering leaches to society on the streets so they don't drain all of our hard-earned money!
86- Bovine Currency
- 303 posts
- Joined: 3 weeks ago
- Hubs: 4
- Fans: 24
egiv wrote:
sneakorocksolid wrote:
The other side want us to provide healthcare for illegals, pay for abortions, pay for people who've never worked a day in their lives and bill it all to the stooges that work. Because it's easier to regulate the honest law abiding citizens.
Clearly everyone who is for the new healthcare bill wants this.
We need to keep those cancer-suffering leaches to society on the streets so they don't drain all of our hard-earned money!The parrots are well fed.
98- Lita Sorensen
- 4523 posts
- Joined: 13 months ago
- Hubs: 80
- Fans: 418
lol! (sorry.)
- 88
- Ron Montgomery
- 2954 posts
- Joined: 7 months ago
- Hubs: 16
- Fans: 143
89- prettydarkhorse
- 2013 posts
- Joined: 2 months ago
- Hubs: 83
- Fans: 172
Ron Montgomery wrote:
LOL
i might not agree with glen but i still lend him a ear
