ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel


Updated on March 30, 2012

A critical decision for the justices.

It will be a disappointment, if the United States Supreme Court decides to vote 5 to 4 against the Affordable Health Care Act by President Barack Obama, on political grounds.

The justices are people too, and they are likely to consider political inclinations first before any other options; yet, to lean on politics than the fact that more citizens will have health insurance coverage under the law will be an abomination.

Besides, the constitutionality opinion is likely to be that the U.S. Congress can pass a law to mandate anything that it sees fit and proper for a great majority of citizens, such as Social Security.

Automobile insurance is another category that every American has to have, if they are to have the use of a motor vehicle. Without that, there will be too many accidents on the road resulting in unnecessary deaths.

The so called "Obamacare" falls into the same rational, that people will get sick and that they will need health insurance coverage to be able to get medical attention without any kind of impediment; and so, to say that all Americans must have health care coverage makes a great deal of sense.

That is exactly what the Obama health care does, and to insinuate that it forces people "to buy broccoli," is not fair, in that a penalty being attached to the law does not mean that jail sentences will be passed on those not having insurance.

It (penalty) is just there to compel all persons to have the protection they must require in emergency situations and whenever the well being of their personal health is in jeopardy.

In fact, it is in the best interest of everyone to have insurance coverage, to be able to have access to immediate medical help, when he or she requires it, and at the proper time.

Legally, the justices have several options to choose from, as to knock the law out completely or to let it stand as is; and in between, they have the luxury to pick what they think must be part of the law or not.

So, allowing political dogma to penetrate their thinking into making a decision of the kind they are facing will not be a good idea at all; as it will become a precedent that anything that is not to their political taste must be considered as illegal or unlawful.

That will not be equitable; and doing justice to themselves and to society as a whole will be next to impossible, if they choose to follow that path.

Deep thoughts and genuine assessments must be utilized to play a major part in reaching a decision, as millions of Americans are relying on them (justices) to prove that they, as Americans, can have the law on their side and to be able to treat an ailment without any hindrance, when it happens to them.

That is what the whole argument boils down to; that people having their health needs met, when they become incapacitated; and not to permit politics to deprive them a right that they must have; that is taking care of their own ... given bodies in the proper manner.

Again, the justices are human too, and therefore they must be for or on the human side, rather than on pure political persuasion that is only man-made, to deliberately embarrass another political entity.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • mio cid profile image

      mio cid 5 years ago from Uruguay

      Obamacare will be a signature legacy of president Obama to our country,even if this healthcare reform doesn't stand and is scrapped by the supreme court, eventually one day there will be healthcare available to all citizens just like today there is social security available to all and that day that healthcare plan will be the successor of this plan and Obama will be recognized as the father of healthcare reform in the country,along with Ted kennedy.