There's a lot of people out there who suggest that healthcare is a 'right.' I also find it interesting that many of the people who believe that, are also people who are readily willing to surrender certain rights as soon as keeping that right appears difficult or carries any sort of risk along with it.
I think that people who believe that healthcare is a 'right,' don't really understand what a 'right' is to begin with.
People believe that a 'right' is something that a government can give to you, or take away from you arbitrarily as circumstances would determine... That is not a 'right,' that is a rule, or a 'policy.'
A right is not something that is decided by governments. A right is decided by our very nature as humans, and cannot be mandated, leglislated, or abolished by anyone, as no one on earth has the 'right' to assign ot remove rights arbitrarily.
The founders of this country understood this, and so when they approached the concept of 'rights,' they did so from the perspective that rights are 'god given,' and are not a list of privlages that are given to you by the government, but a list of basic fundamental expressions of life which a government cannot take away.
Rights are not a 'societal construct,' but the expression of each individual's ability to think and choose for themselves, and to express themselves freely. In other words, rights are not a list of things that the government, or a society decides that you are allowed to do, but a list of things that the government, or society, is not allowed to interfere with or dictate to anyone on an individual level.
To criticize idividualism is to criticize rights, because the concept of 'rights,' only exists, or has any real relevance on the plane of the individual.
Rights apply to the individual, and end as soon as the practicing of one's rights begins to infringe on another's rights. Therefore, no one has the 'right' to anything which must be provided by another person for them, as to view the benefits or sacrifices of someone elses hard work as something which you have a 'right' to, is exactly what slavery is.
The civil war was fought because there were people who believed that they had the 'right' to force others to work for them, and that they were entitled to the benefits of hard work and labor of others. Clearly, such a thing is flawed, as it does not consider the rights of those who have been enslaved. It is the perversion of the very concept of 'rights,' and once again is more akin to manmade 'rules,' that have NOTHING to do with rights.
Now, when we understand what rights are, and we apply it to something like healthcare, which relies on the hard work and expertise of highly dedicated, educated and trained individuals, we clearly see that healthcare is not a 'right,' healthcare is a service.
We absolutely should live in a world where such services are available to anyone who needs it, however, there are realities and limitations to the world we live in which we must account for. Sometimes, the world we live in is not ideal. That's life, and we must be observant of and respect the conditions of reality if we ever hope to actually adapt to it and create a way of functioning within it.
To say that healthcare is a 'right,' then demand that such a 'right' be provided and maintained by a government whos constantly sought to take rights away from people is not an answer worth considering. If we look at how governments behave towards human rights, assume that healthcare is a right, then charge the government with the role of arbitrating the creation and distribution of that right, in essence, you are advocating for the abolishment of every medical professional's rights, as well as every patient's right to decide on what sort of healthcare that they wish to seek for themselves when needed.
When we look at it from this perspective, it makes sense now why many who would support the idea that healthcare is a 'right' to be given by a government that makes broad medical decisions and forces everyone into it, instead of the idea that medical care is best practiced by doctors on an individual doctor/patient basis, are the same collectivist types who advocate the removal of your rights in favor of protecting the establishment.
They are the same people who suggest that you no longer have the right to healthcare if you don't comply with their mandates.
These are people who have no understanding of government, of healthcare, of human individuality, and ESPECIALLY no understanding of the meaning of the word, 'rights.'
People who don't even know what rights are in the first place, have no right to authoritatively tell anyone else anything about rights.
Anyone who infringes en mass on the rights of the individual should simply practice 'their right to remain silent.'
I think that people who believe that healthcare is a 'right,' don't really understand what a 'right' is to begin with.
People believe that a 'right' is something that a government can give to you, or take away from you arbitrarily as circumstances would determine... That is not a 'right,' that is a rule, or a 'policy.'
A right is not something that is decided by governments. A right is decided by our very nature as humans, and cannot be mandated, leglislated, or abolished by anyone, as no one on earth has the 'right' to assign ot remove rights arbitrarily.
The founders of this country understood this, and so when they approached the concept of 'rights,' they did so from the perspective that rights are 'god given,' and are not a list of privlages that are given to you by the government, but a list of basic fundamental expressions of life which a government cannot take away.
Rights are not a 'societal construct,' but the expression of each individual's ability to think and choose for themselves, and to express themselves freely. In other words, rights are not a list of things that the government, or a society decides that you are allowed to do, but a list of things that the government, or society, is not allowed to interfere with or dictate to anyone on an individual level.
To criticize idividualism is to criticize rights, because the concept of 'rights,' only exists, or has any real relevance on the plane of the individual.
Rights apply to the individual, and end as soon as the practicing of one's rights begins to infringe on another's rights. Therefore, no one has the 'right' to anything which must be provided by another person for them, as to view the benefits or sacrifices of someone elses hard work as something which you have a 'right' to, is exactly what slavery is.
The civil war was fought because there were people who believed that they had the 'right' to force others to work for them, and that they were entitled to the benefits of hard work and labor of others. Clearly, such a thing is flawed, as it does not consider the rights of those who have been enslaved. It is the perversion of the very concept of 'rights,' and once again is more akin to manmade 'rules,' that have NOTHING to do with rights.
Now, when we understand what rights are, and we apply it to something like healthcare, which relies on the hard work and expertise of highly dedicated, educated and trained individuals, we clearly see that healthcare is not a 'right,' healthcare is a service.
We absolutely should live in a world where such services are available to anyone who needs it, however, there are realities and limitations to the world we live in which we must account for. Sometimes, the world we live in is not ideal. That's life, and we must be observant of and respect the conditions of reality if we ever hope to actually adapt to it and create a way of functioning within it.
To say that healthcare is a 'right,' then demand that such a 'right' be provided and maintained by a government whos constantly sought to take rights away from people is not an answer worth considering. If we look at how governments behave towards human rights, assume that healthcare is a right, then charge the government with the role of arbitrating the creation and distribution of that right, in essence, you are advocating for the abolishment of every medical professional's rights, as well as every patient's right to decide on what sort of healthcare that they wish to seek for themselves when needed.
When we look at it from this perspective, it makes sense now why many who would support the idea that healthcare is a 'right' to be given by a government that makes broad medical decisions and forces everyone into it, instead of the idea that medical care is best practiced by doctors on an individual doctor/patient basis, are the same collectivist types who advocate the removal of your rights in favor of protecting the establishment.
They are the same people who suggest that you no longer have the right to healthcare if you don't comply with their mandates.
These are people who have no understanding of government, of healthcare, of human individuality, and ESPECIALLY no understanding of the meaning of the word, 'rights.'
People who don't even know what rights are in the first place, have no right to authoritatively tell anyone else anything about rights.
Anyone who infringes en mass on the rights of the individual should simply practice 'their right to remain silent.'
There's a lot of people out there who suggest that healthcare is a 'right.' I also find it interesting that many of the people who believe that, are also people who are readily willing to surrender certain rights as soon as keeping that right appears difficult or carries any sort of risk along with it.
I think that people who believe that healthcare is a 'right,' don't really understand what a 'right' is to begin with.
People believe that a 'right' is something that a government can give to you, or take away from you arbitrarily as circumstances would determine... That is not a 'right,' that is a rule, or a 'policy.'
A right is not something that is decided by governments. A right is decided by our very nature as humans, and cannot be mandated, leglislated, or abolished by anyone, as no one on earth has the 'right' to assign ot remove rights arbitrarily.
The founders of this country understood this, and so when they approached the concept of 'rights,' they did so from the perspective that rights are 'god given,' and are not a list of privlages that are given to you by the government, but a list of basic fundamental expressions of life which a government cannot take away.
Rights are not a 'societal construct,' but the expression of each individual's ability to think and choose for themselves, and to express themselves freely. In other words, rights are not a list of things that the government, or a society decides that you are allowed to do, but a list of things that the government, or society, is not allowed to interfere with or dictate to anyone on an individual level.
To criticize idividualism is to criticize rights, because the concept of 'rights,' only exists, or has any real relevance on the plane of the individual.
Rights apply to the individual, and end as soon as the practicing of one's rights begins to infringe on another's rights. Therefore, no one has the 'right' to anything which must be provided by another person for them, as to view the benefits or sacrifices of someone elses hard work as something which you have a 'right' to, is exactly what slavery is.
The civil war was fought because there were people who believed that they had the 'right' to force others to work for them, and that they were entitled to the benefits of hard work and labor of others. Clearly, such a thing is flawed, as it does not consider the rights of those who have been enslaved. It is the perversion of the very concept of 'rights,' and once again is more akin to manmade 'rules,' that have NOTHING to do with rights.
Now, when we understand what rights are, and we apply it to something like healthcare, which relies on the hard work and expertise of highly dedicated, educated and trained individuals, we clearly see that healthcare is not a 'right,' healthcare is a service.
We absolutely should live in a world where such services are available to anyone who needs it, however, there are realities and limitations to the world we live in which we must account for. Sometimes, the world we live in is not ideal. That's life, and we must be observant of and respect the conditions of reality if we ever hope to actually adapt to it and create a way of functioning within it.
To say that healthcare is a 'right,' then demand that such a 'right' be provided and maintained by a government whos constantly sought to take rights away from people is not an answer worth considering. If we look at how governments behave towards human rights, assume that healthcare is a right, then charge the government with the role of arbitrating the creation and distribution of that right, in essence, you are advocating for the abolishment of every medical professional's rights, as well as every patient's right to decide on what sort of healthcare that they wish to seek for themselves when needed.
When we look at it from this perspective, it makes sense now why many who would support the idea that healthcare is a 'right' to be given by a government that makes broad medical decisions and forces everyone into it, instead of the idea that medical care is best practiced by doctors on an individual doctor/patient basis, are the same collectivist types who advocate the removal of your rights in favor of protecting the establishment.
They are the same people who suggest that you no longer have the right to healthcare if you don't comply with their mandates.
These are people who have no understanding of government, of healthcare, of human individuality, and ESPECIALLY no understanding of the meaning of the word, 'rights.'
People who don't even know what rights are in the first place, have no right to authoritatively tell anyone else anything about rights.
Anyone who infringes en mass on the rights of the individual should simply practice 'their right to remain silent.'
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Portuguese (Brazil)
Greek