5,460 Forum Posts by "HighlyIllogical"
Ok, here's a topic that might be interesting. What would you think is your favorite nation? State a nation or two and say why you like it so much. And, perhaps, discuss the validity of the opinions of others.
A fetus isn't living. It's just a few cells.
Why should a woman who has something inside of her not be allowed to regulate it?
Why should old men on capital hill regulate a woman's body?
At 1/3/06 07:54 PM, Elfer wrote: Since socialized healthcare has been around for some time now, a lot of people here consider access to medical care a human right rather than something to be bought and sold.
If you can pay for this human right, then you should. If you can't the government should pay for you. And what about the issue of not getting treatment if it's not 'immediately' needed in these socialist paradise nations? Why should someone have to wait months, even years, for treatments that in an insurance based (with government care for those who can't afford insurance) health-care system, would be done immediately?
At 1/3/06 03:48 PM, -BAWLS- wrote: Those who "have the means" pay higher in taxes, thus providing healthcare both for themselves and those who can't afford it. That's not unreasonable.
They pay for themselves through their own private methods. Which is fair. And then they cover the cost for those who can't afford private care. Why say that those with means need to pay for those who don't? Because it's only fair. And logical, to boot. A healthy workforce means a productive workforce.
At 1/3/06 07:43 PM, smith916 wrote: Here's an Idea, why dont doctors just CHARGE LESS for inspecting people's Boo Boo
s and check ups and peeing in the cup.
Well, by doing this, we discourage qualified people from becoming doctors because there won't be impetus (i.e. $) for them to become doctors. Then, we have an influx of crappy, underpaid doctors who move here from the 3rd world and will work for substandard wages.
3rd would countries dont have medicare because they
1) Cant tax there people who are already dirt poor
2) have poor hospitalization.
How about corruption, no infastructure, high HIV/AIDS prevalence rates etc?
America doesn't have medicare because it's CAPTIALISM.
Uhh...actually, medicare is the name of a government program in the united states that provides poor, differently-abled and elderly people with care.
Rich, is just a common liberal term used to describe anyone who earns more than somone who ISNT on welfare, aka, you, me, him, we're all considered rich.
That's just funny. I can't even dignify that with a response.
Taxing people who actually do earn more than most people and the unemployment rate will go down, this more people will need medicare, mediaid, and welfare, and the cyle continues.
How's that for you? Tax more and unemployment goes down! When taxes go up, businesses fire people who they don't percieve to need. Make sense now?
At 1/3/06 03:59 PM, ReiperX wrote: I support a nationalized health care system. It would have saved me a lot of trouble a year and a half ago.
I spent 5 years in the US Marines, always paid my taxes while in the service, always paid my taxes on my jobs I had before I joined...Well wife and I are doing to TN for an interview and are in a bad car accident <my Tacoma tried to mate with a Semi Truck, ruled our fault but nothing my wife could have done to prevent the accident when our tire blew>. Luckily we were both ok but we went to the hospital anyways to make sure that there were no internal injuries...So we go to the hospital, we take a shower at the hospital to get the glass off of us, nurse digs a smal piece of glass out of my ear and the doctor asks a few questions. In all that cost us $666.55. Living off of $180 a week I couldn't really afford insurance or to pay the bill. After this happened, yeah I became a supporter of national health care, both of our credits got hurt by this, and it caused a lot of troubles when we couldn't afford to pay it, not because we didn't want to, because we didn't have jobs yet.
What about vets benefits? Perhaps these could be extended? And then, since you couldn't afford it at the time, the government should provide it for you then and when anyone can't afford it. Those who can afford it should have to pay on their own or through an insurance company.
We need a clear amendment stating basic privacy rights-the right to be protected from unreasonable search and siezure (though it's already the 4th amendment, it's needing a restatement...), protection from wiretaps that haven't been legally stated with a warrant etc.
The US needs to repeal the patriot act, for one.
At 1/3/06 12:06 AM, shi_huangdi wrote: nah, bush isn't a nazi, he loves israel too much, might be why he has something against arabs
Bush loves Israel? What about the bullshit "Roadmap for Peace?" And, more importantly, what we have to do is educate people about equality so they realize the inherent stupidity of nazism.
Did I ever argue that those who can't afford it shouldn't have health insurance? I think not. I said that if you have the means to get healthcare, then you shouldn't have the government pay for your care. That's unreasonable. Plus, we have to improve the quality of health care and competition is the best way to maintain it.
It can't happen. It's been proven too expensive in europe and nationalized healthcare, without competition, discourages improvement because there's no competition.
No, we don't want to join a club. Let's build it, but let more in legally by increasing terror screening but decreasing bureacracy that prohibits immigration for people who want and need to come here and can help improve the state of our nation! We need immigration, it provides the economic base of this country.
At 1/3/06 01:39 PM, red_skunk wrote: Are you people saying that the Republican Party is "against" essential constitutional rights?
In multiple cases, yes, we've observed this. 4th amendment violations by Bush and Nixon, unreasonable trial against Clinton based on morality, not legality (at least, until he purjured), Republicans in texas supporting sodomy legislation, Republicans opposing gay marriage and civil unions, republicans violating voting rights in florida (25,000 african-americans prohibited from voting), the list goes on and on.
1. Einstein never wore socks.
2. FDR had an affair with a secretary.
3. Patton had two ivory handled six shooters which he carried with him.
4. Rasputin's pickled and severed penis is on display in Russia. Look it up.
Nationalized healthcare-Is it a good idea for the United States? Please, only substantitive comments that relate to the topic and which are well documented or supported.
I want proof as to Jews taking part in the crucifixion. Prove it.
You know, it seems that most of the recent republicans HAVE been liberty-haters.
I concur. But with someone who is not such a criminal, is it efficient or of any deterrent to execute them? I think not.
You do know, guys, that the US and South America are the real population centers of observant Christians, not Europe.
At 1/2/06 07:15 PM, MegalomaniacVirus wrote:
Fine, hears another damn quote for you.
"A government big enough to supply you with anything is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history has taught us that as a government grows, liberty decreases."
-Thomas Jefferson
Don't be daft. Big government needs big regulation, and it'll have it. Liberties are only lost when fear is there and social conservatives are in power.
Nothing will stop us from repealing them. All we have to have is fear, that'll be the catalyst for anything. Then, I guess I'm off to Israel, Canada, Sweden, Luxembourg or Denmark.
Hear hear! The death penalty, on average, costs over $1 million in trial and execution costs. Why so expensive? Unlimited appeals, massive trials with tons of experts and lawyers etc. That's why execution is stupid, regardless of morality. Best way to get rid of these criminals is LWOP (life [in prison] without [the possibillity of] paroleKilling war criminals and the ilk is something I support completely, however.
Actually, it's best to be a social liberal but an economic conservative. Economic liberalism (free healthcare for all, including those who can afford it, huge tax breaks for the rich etc.) is bullshit and has no historical nor theoretical basic. Social liberalism lets people do what they wish, worship and speak and write what they wish without interference as long as it's not harmful to others (ie incites violence).
The ACLU is protecting rights. This current president is certainly impeachable. He's led the US into Iraq under false pretenses (WMD, though I have no problem with getting rid of Hussein, we should have just said "he violates human rights and is a threat to the stability of the region" and bombed the shit out of him and then shot the bastard as a war criminal and such) and has perpetrated and exacerbated violations of the 4th amendment to the constitution.
At 1/2/06 07:03 PM, Tyler_Durden0 wrote: They didnt like jesus, and they wanted to kill him, but the romans got to him first. It's just a known fact that the jews hated christians, so we blammed them.
Not true at all. I'm Jewish, and most of my friends are Christians. This is bullshit and you all know it. Blaming us leads to anti-semitism (which this thread is full of), passion plays and persecution and/or killing. However, Joshua of Nazareth's death was insignificant at the time. Thousands were crucified, it's only after his death that he becomes a significant historical figure.
At 1/2/06 05:37 PM, -Shadic- wrote:At 1/2/06 02:52 PM, HomeGrownTurnip wrote: Basically forced to work = Slave labour = illegalA. Not slave labor. You get PAID, the very difference between employment and slavery. and it's not illegal if the country doesn't say it is. The United States may be trying, but they don't own the world.
B. Let's go to capitalism then. I decide not to work. i can't purchase anything, therefore I DIE. THat's like saying you have the choice of being forced to eat something no matter if you like it or not, or having the freedom of eating that same thing or shooting a bullet through your face., and the second choice is that much better.
If you decide not to work and/or educate yourself, you are just lazy and a drain on socity.
In communist nations and in socialist european nations you can get off the hook from working by simply showing that you're 'looking' for work and you'll get huge unemployment benefits. We can't have the government babysit lazy people who aren't either working, in school or doing both. That's why europe suffers from high unemployment, at least, to a point.
At 1/1/06 08:53 PM, -Shadic- wrote: It's because minorities have been given a disadvantage economically and socially, whilst most white peopel haven't. I'd bet there are also jew only colleges.
That's bull. No Jewish only colleges exist.
At 1/2/06 02:14 PM, punisher19848 wrote: Know why their "peacekeepers" don't do anything? Because it's all a farce! The U.N. troops are their for display puposes only and the warlords in their respective regions know it: as long as they don't attack the U.N. compound, they can do whatever the hell they want to! They can on swiping U.N. aid shipments, fighting each other, and commiting acts of genocide because the U.N. won't do shit. Not to mention that some of these warlords and rouge govts. may actually be paying the U.N. off (remember the "oil fo food" fiasco?).
If the mission of the U.N. really is to prevent conflict, they have failed in this mission miserably.
So damn true. Belgian peacekeepers in the Congo, I think, were unwilling to protect ppeople even when given intel. What we need is for the peacekeepers to make peace through a show of force.
Historically speaking, no Jews participated in the crucifixtion or show trial of Joshua of Nazareth. The Romans are a dead civilization. All of the blame was placed on us Jews because of misinformation-blood libel and all that bullshit. If you really want to blame anyone, blame Pontus Pilate, a ROMAN. But why have Jews been persecuted? Because until recently and even today, to a point, Jews are easy targets. We've been targets for generations, but these days, people are coming to terms with historical facts and such so they stop being assholes. And, in modern times, the percieved enemy of Christianity is the proseltysing Islamic religion, whereas Judaism never actively converted people or went after converts. The Quran actually tells Muslims to tax Jews and Christians, as people of the book who weren't supposed to be persecuted, but were taxed and treated as dhimmi, second rate people. And then there's all of this anti-semitic and anti-American crap that the Arabs spew.
Affirmative action is just racism in reverse. Plus, it only really seems to help large minority populations, not smaller ones anyway.
Also, it's holding back progress and innovation. Why should someone who happens to be a minority get into Harvard above a white male who has better grades and SATs? Things like that happen and they're bullshit.
The UN has proven itself to be innefectual and bigoted. Think about the hundreds of anti-Israel regulations, but there are so few directed towards abuses of human rights in Arab nations-honor killings, murders of homosexuals sanctioned by the nations etc. And what about the presence of nations like these and China on the Human Rights Council? The UN can't do anything!
DP is both too costly, too final, too misdirected and too wimpy. I would think that it's worse to be in an 8'x6' cell 23 hours a day with an hour of hiding from the guys with knives in the jail yard (and all of this for the rest of your life) than to be dead in an instant from a potassium injection which stops your heart.
