The fallacy of Christian Conservatives.
My grandmother was a very religious person and possibly the most decent person I’ve ever met. She believed the bible word for word. Gave money to Oral Roberts and Pat Robertson. Went to church regularly. Never swore or lied that I could tell and treated everyone equally her entire life, no matter race, creed, color. She believed that you’re put here to not simply help yourself, but others. Show compassion for everybody, not just those you wanted to, and that while money was vital, it was not worth living or dying for. She was also a lifelong democrat.
I think about that when I try to resolve how the ultra-religious, ultra-conservative dead-enders justify many of their beliefs. It seems to me that the conservative platform of the last 8 to 10 years conflicts greatly with the reality of being a good Christian. While I’ve had ridiculous arguments to the contrary, Christianity in essence is more than just a belief in Christ. It is a belief in his basic tenant:
Matthew 7: 12Treat others as you want them to treat you. This is what the Law and the Prophets are all about.
And, if that doesn’t confirm it for you, we have this quote:
James 2:2 My friends, if you have faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, you won’t treat some people better than others…. 9But if you treat some people better than others, you have done wrong, and the Scriptures teach that you have sinned.
Most of my conservative friends follow a belief that rounds out to this:
Those who are invalid and mentally ill deserve our help, but everyone else is on their own.
Tax systems should never be designed to appropriate one’s private property (income) for the purpose of distributing that property to another person who has done nothing to earn it.( i.e. My wealth is not meant to suppliment anyone else’s bad judgements, bad luck or circumstances beyond their control. Social programs such as Welfare, head start and others are government’s foray into that area and not welcome in my book).
Public services the government should provide for its citizens include a standing army, law enforcement and other such protections, roadways, and schools. The government should never raise more money than is required to find direct, basic services (i.e. If you can’t afford healthcare, that’s not my problem).
This is a Judaeo-Christian country (i.e. If you are muslim, hindu, atheist or any other form of religion that does not act or sound very American, you should be happy being a second class citizen here).
Now, as you can see, there are basic tenants of the conservative movement and what they mean to conservatives in every day society. The new Christian conservatives like to say they believe government can’t be trusted, but that’s really just a nice face put on the statement “I don’t want to be taxed anymore” or “The welfare of others is not my problem.”
I think that, even if we put aside everything else mentioned here, the idea that we live in a society where healthcare is a business for profit is grotesque. The fact that many Christian conservatives would consider a discussion about covering everyone a conversation-ender is pathetic. And for those who feel that human beings have no real responsibility for other human beings beyond our own personal bubbles is truly sad. Many other countries do not function this way. Their systems aren’t perfect - nothing is - but they have the welfare of everyone in mind - and on our shores we are able to make Medicare work pretty well. What is wrong with a system where those who choose to pay more can get some extra attention and those who choose not to (or can’t) get equally good attention?
I think if you’re going to call yourself Christian, you gotta walk the walk. Just like you question the validity of anyone who doesn’t believe the bible word for word, I question the validity of someone who doesn’t follow the teachings of that same bible word for word. In fact, the latter is more important than the former.
“What is wrong with a system where those who choose to pay more can get some extra attention and those who choose not to (or can’t) get equally good attention?”
If you took a statistics class or basic economics class you would understand that this would work in a perfect world or a vacuum free of outside interference. I work in the healthcare industry in physician sales distribution and I have an inside view of how their world works. In case you didn’t know, the way they make money is not just from the office visit but from different testing and diagnosing an ailment or running a test. For instance, you have the symptoms of strep so they test for it. Medicare reimburses a certain amount to the doctor for the test. Medicare reimbursement is the standard with private pay being much higher on average. HMOs don’t pay shit and Doctor’s hate them.
If the government decides to implement a universal healthcare system a couple of things are going to happen:
1) Medicare reimbursement will go down because more people are recieving a piece of the same pie (basic econ), thus forcing private pay to go down because Insurance companies base their pay out on medicare rates.
2) Becuase the reimbursement has gone down Doctors will be forced to see even more patients than they normally would because they are not bringing in enough revenue to keep their practice running.
If you turn these practices into patient screening conveyor belts you are doing a dis-service to everyone. So yes, everyone will recieve the same treatment but it will be inferior to what is already going on.
I have some Doctor’s that do a lot of pro bono work, but they have a large stream of private pay patients to counter balance the otherwise net lose they would experience.
Don’t cunfuse being good christian with the harsh reality of how the world really works.
Actually, Jonathan, I’m quite aware of how the system works. I used to work at UCLA Outpatient center for 3 years scheduling MRI’s, CTs and GI’s, produced medical films for Pfizer, Bristol Myers and the like and also had a longtime girlfriend who was doing her residency at the time.
The problem we have today is that everything on a hospital menu is viewed as “ala carte.” Take three tests for a questionable abscess and you’re into the hospital for $10,000.
Be aware, however, that nothing is black and white. That’s the one fallacy that’s been ingrained for some reason in people’s psyches.
I do, however, feel that the insurance most doctors have to pay is a crime in itself. It’s what’s cutting into most of their profits. If limits could be made on reimbursement in a lawsuit, and preventative care were more readily available (most people do not frequent their doctor’s for fear of costs), we would not have a situation where they would need to worry about their income.
Now, there are doctor’s living quite well in other country’s that are part of the government system. Do they make $500,000 a year or more as a surgeon? Probably not. $200,000? Yes.
The answer should not always be what is good for JUST me. That’s the equivalent of living your life as a piece of meat instead of someone who cares about his fellow man. Our healthcare system, if nothing else, should be at the service of THAT notion, not purely for profit. The fact that many in this country are cynical about that notion and cynical about universal healthcare working is due to the enormous amount of negatives pushed upon them by - well - the people who benefit from a private system most.
Harsh reality is relative. The obscenity of what happens to people within HMO’s today is obscene, but to some it’s the devil they know and are comfortable with that. I think there’s a better way.
“The answer should not always be what is good for JUST me. That’s the equivalent of living your life as a piece of meat instead of someone who cares about his fellow man. Our healthcare system, if nothing else, should be at the service of THAT notion, not purely for profit.”
But how or why is it my responsibility to pay for another person’s health care? Is it law that I am responsible for the wel being of another? If it makes me selfish, fine. And if it is my God given responsibilty to look after the well-being of another person, he also gave us the ability to choose for ourselves. If I choose to not help my fellow man out by covering the cost of his Doctor visit and I end up being turned away from the pearly gates, than I’ll be damned… literally.
It is your responsibility to pay for theirs. It is somebody elses responsibility to pay for yours. What we are talking about is shared responsibility.
My parents are on Social Security. My dad paid SS in his paycheck his entire working career and made a good amount of money. Now that he’s retired, he gets social security. Thanks to the economic downturn, their nest egg has been destroyed. For those who disagree with this type of “socialist” system, their answer would be, “Well. Tough luck. If he’s out on the street he’s out on the street.” Very Christian, isn’t it?
I pay social security. It goes to those who paid it for the previous generation. For some people, it is all they have to live on. Healthcare should be regarded in the same light.
I’ll add another religion-twinged quote: “There but for the grace of God go I.” You never know what is going to happen to you in this life and, should you find yourself in a situation you never could imagine yourself in, wouldn’t it be comforting to know you live in a society where your value isn’t the sum of your paycheck - where if you are a recent invalid you won’t simply be thrown out onto the street.
Sure. There are people who buck the system. Always will be. Take a look at Wall Street. These guys walking away with million dollar bonuses as the rest of us tank. You think they’re not bucking the system? In their case, they’re costing us a great deal more than a homeless guy who needs to be hospitalized. It’s all relative, man.