It is in the interest of the "General Welfare" that people not be subject to death just because they cannot afford a doctor. -------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------- From: "awaylate" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 7:42 AM To: "AlexBennettProgram" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Socialism vs. Social Programs > > I would argue that promoting the general welfare meant something very > different than paying for everyone's health care. Continued > recognition of new "rights" while relieving people of their own > responsibilities makes children of us all, with government as the > parent. People have the right to eat the bread earned by their own > work, and the right to be left alone. The Constitution is actually an > enumeration of "negative rights," proscribing what the Government > can't do. The government can't tell me what to say. It can't tell me > who to associate with, it can't keep me from owning the means of my > own self-defense. Nowhere does the Constitution tell me what our > society owes me, other than the common defense. The government (or > the People) does not owe me a home, does not owe me sustenance, does > not owe me happiness. What the government owes us all is a civil > structure that allows us to take care of ourselves without having to > worry about assault or oppression by others, including oppression by > mob rule. > > On Oct 27, 9:38 am, Brian S Paskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> There are many items that are not in the Constitution. However, the >> preamble of the Constitution does say, >> >> "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect >> Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the >> common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings >> of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish >> this Constitution for the United States of America." >> >> I would argue that "promote the general Welfare" covers health care. >> >> -- >> Regards / Saluti / mit Freundlichen Grüßen, >> Brian >> >> #-------------------------------------------# >> "La pittura è una poesia che si vede >> e non si sente, e la poesia è una >> pittura che si sente e non si vede." >> >> email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]://www.paskino.com >> #-------------------------------------------# >> >> On Oct 27, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Dan in Atlanta wrote: >> >> >> >> > That's the issue a lot of right wingers like to fall back on. >> >> > The "right" to health care is not officially in the Constitution, >> > there fore it is not a right of Americans. But I say that it is, at >> > the very least, a natural right; and if we need to formally put it in >> > the Constitution to satisfy those people, then I say we do so. >> >> > On Oct 27, 10:07 am, "Brian S. Paskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> The Republicans, and some Democrats, do not know the difference >> >> between Socialism and social programs. Even Alex says Europe has >> >> Socialism. That is not exactly true. The States do not own any >> >> industries, except maybe the Post, and now some banks after the >> >> financial disaster of the last few months. What they do is tax >> >> people's income at a higher rate to give people more social programs, >> >> like health care, child care and education. The question is giving >> >> someone health care and education a redistribution of wealth, a sign >> >> of Socialism, or a right of the people. >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Brian (Cambridge, MA) > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AlexBennettProgram" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/alexbennettprogram?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
