On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Charles Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:


> The very idea that we can talk of health care as a right is unique to
> countries that can actually afford the luxury
> of social services.
>
> I usually argue that it is not actually a right, but a decision by
> society to provide a service.
>
> The difference, in my definition of a right, is that actual rights
> incur only negative obligations.
>
> (These rights exists inside the social contract only.   A lion will
> not recognize your right to life, nor many of the two legged predators.
> They give up the protections of the contract in order to live outside
> the contract.   That's why we can hunt them down and kill them if
> needed. Without violating the right to life..)
>
>
> right to life..  All I have to do is to not kill you.
> liberty.  I just don't enslave you.
> right to free speech.   I just leave you alone.
> right to free use of property.   I just stay on my side of the fence.
>
> All of them require that I merely do nothing against you.
>
> Health Care?   How does that work exactly.   You make a claim on my
> production to give you something that you personally can't afford?
> By what "right" do you make this claim?
>
> If I have a right to housing, the I want to live at the Kennedy
> compound.
>
> If I have a right to health care then I want the level of care that
> Teddy is getting.
> If we followed Dashel's book, Teddy would be declare too old to
> deserve any experimental treatments since the "cost benefit" would not
> be there.
>
> But I guess some are more equal than others, eh comrades?
>
> We can choose, as a society, to provide that service, for now, and for
> as long as we can afford it,  but I argue that it is not a right in
> any real sense
>
> You (society) cannot actually FORCE me to produce anything.
>
> These, so called, rights depend on the willing participation of the
> producer.
>
> If I refuse to work, you simply cannot obtain whatever it is that you
> would declare to be a right without enslaving me.
>
> Therefore, it is not actually a right.

That is all perfectly correct, but none of it addresses the question
of whether, let alone *how* a civilized society should best provide
healthcare to its citizens.
_______________________________________________
OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected]
http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters
List hosted at http://cat5.org/

Reply via email to