Ask:

I’m not referring to any individual health care bill or idea for reform. I’m talking only about the concept of health care itself.

Do you believe a society that considers itself advanced has any moral obligations to care for the sick?

Do you believe everyone should fend for themselves? If so, are you comfortable with the fact that while that means some abusers of the system (whatever that may be) will die, so too will some who are innocent?

Answers:

Answer 1:

This is the very thing that differentiates a society from lone hunter-gatherers. The final evolutionary step that separated us from other animals was the development of agriculture. Before, it was “every primate for himself.” People hunted and gathered food for themselves and their families. Those who couldn’t, died. That’s the fundamental rule of the animal kingdom.

But the development of agriculture brought about an entirely new concept. Instead of simply feeding your family, people worked the land and shared it with the community, even those who were too weak to fend for themselves. Rather than dying, these individuals with weaker physical bodies who developed relying on their minds started developing literature, science, art, and invention.

Our society would not be where it is today if we reverted back to the primitive Darwinian mindset that many on the right (who, ironically enough, generally tend to despise Darwin’s theories) espouse. You are able to make money because you live in a SOCIETY that is stable (more or less). You don’t have to worry about roaming gangs storming into your office and stealing all your possessions. You can call the police, asocial service. If your building catches fire, you can call the fire department, a social service. Your kids go to school so they can carry on the family’s success and so you can go to work every day rather than staying home to teach them.

That said, health care is the one exception in this country. Unlike every other social service, which is paid by taxes, health care is being rationed and partitioned for the most fortunate. The less fortunate, who wash the dishes and drive the cabs and put out the fires, they’re being denied access to what the rest of the civilized world regards as a basic human right.

If you don’t want to sacrifice a little to help the society, even if it brings no direct benefit to yourself, then you can always leave the society and see how successful you are without the rest of us. You can build a log cabin in Montana, hunt and gather your own food, and have the satisfaction of knowing that you’re not looking out for anyone but yourself.

We can have a valid debate over *how* universal health care should be implemented and *who* should be running it. But the question of whether or not we have both an evolutionary and a moral imperative to provide health care to all our citizens has already been settled by the rest of the modern world. If you don’t want to catch-up to them along with the rest of us, you can always go back to living in the forest.

Answer 2:

I believe everyone should “fend for themselves” to the very best of their ability. However, is many cases, this simply isn’t enough. I wrote recently, for example, about being refused service because I could not afford to pay the entire bridge amount owed to a ob/gyn. I have excellent insurance which costs $250 per month. The doctor has been paid very well up to this point by the insurance company. I have/had a bridge to meet and they absolutely refused to work with me; rather, they demanded payment in full, and for some “if it happens services”, which the insurance wouldn’t buy in a second. When I could not pay, my daughter was refused service and she is 33 weeks pregnant! Also, for 25+ years I have NEVER used ANY type of government assistance. Recently, my daughter did sign up for State Healthcare and this doctor too would not accept this insurance. Seems to me it’s all about the money in the docs pockets and not a bit about the genuine need for care by the people. I’ve noticed too over the years that more and more prescriptions are given and I have a funny feeling their pockets (the docs) are lined by the pharmaceutical companies. We’re used as guinea pigs. Who, after all, is most upset by the potential change?

I do believe we need overhaul and this should include everyone (there are abusers of everything; this is life). Most people are honest and don’t abuse.