Tea Party Questions

This is what we are discussing.The Tea Party wants people without insurance to die because they lack "personal responsibility".I'm saying that a 5 year old CAN NOT HAVE personal responsibility and therefore should not be allowed to DIE for lack of it.You are arguing that they should because you think their parents aren't responsible enough.It doesn't matter whether or not the parents are responsible. The parents are different people than the child. The child is a US citizen and does not deserve to die because some OTHER US citizen may or may not be responsible enough.

Because a 5 year old can not have A job, let alone a SECOND job.

Again, this is not my responsibility. If the parents can't afford healthcare for their children, they shouldn't have had them.

Of course not silly. His parents/guardians can. After all, he/she is their responsibility, not mine.

The last bastion of the indefensible."I'm right but I'm not going to tell you why because I don't care".Uh huh. VERY convincing.LOL.

You still think that children are objects. They aren't. They are citizens.If you were saying "If they can't afford car insurance, they shouldn't own the car", then I would agree with you.You are not denying the car anything because the car is an object.These children are citizens. It doesn't matter if the parents can afford them or not, that's not the child's fault.Am I saying that ALL children in America deserve the EXACT same level of everything? Nope. Some kids are going to have nice bikes. Some kids are going to have to walk to school. Some kids are going to go to summer camp. Some kids are going to be in a house with no air conditioning.That's not something we can or should address as a society.However, ALL citizens, regardless of their parents, should be granted a certain basic level of care simply by the nature of being US citizens.That should include:
- Health care
- Food
- Education
- Clothing and ShelterAt the VERY LEAST we as a society can insure that all US citizens under the age of 18 are promised this most minimum level of care REGARDLESS of if they are orphans, or the children of criminals, or the children of the working poor, or even the children of the lazy.

Again, you are reversing it."He is _their_ responsibility".So, _HE_, the innocent US citizen who did NOTHING wrong, should be allowed to suffer if _THEY_ the adult US citizen who did SOMETHING wrong fails to provide adequately for them.You don't hold Person A responsible for Person B's actions or in-actions.If you and your wife were killed in a car accident, should we allow your children to starve to death in their bedrooms?OR, would you expect ME, a tax payer, to pay for Child Protective Services to see that your children whom you FAILED to provide for by dying, are placed in foster care.After all, YOU were the one who was irresponsible and got hit by a drunk driver. Clearly it's not my fault you were so irresponsible.

Who's going to pay for it?

CPS is gub'ment. I'm against the gub'ment meddling in mah affairs. Them kids have family.Dammit. The longer I keep up this charade, the dumber I get. I can't believe I had you going so long. If you can't tell, I was playing devil's advocate in Coyote's absense.

It's good satire, but is Theodoric giving a thumbs up to the satire, or to the actual statement? Slightly concerning...

Tax payers. The same people that pay for the roads, the army, the FBI and everything else.Then, as these kids grow up, they too will pay taxes.We'll call them "the next generation".

In lurk mode and as a person from the UK I find not wanting to support the less well off totally bizarre.All this seems very Ayn Rand, to me.

More and more the ultra christian conservative right is seemingly championing Ayn Rand, all while failing to remember she was pro-choice and an atheist.....

Quite simple really. That same system would pay for your medical care if you were in the same situation.What is wrong with the idea of giving out medical care on the basis of people's health instead of what class they come from? For profit medical care will always leave out the bottom 10% because there is no profit in lowering your prices to treat the bottom 10%. When a chance at a healthy life is based on your social class it is immoral, at least in my book.

You forgot "amoral" and "stupid." The rich don't hold the world on their backs - they few stand on the shoulders of the many who are poor and do the actual work.

quote:

---

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy, 1961 Inaugural Address

---