If the answer is "yes" are you in favor of the gov't making choices regarding your body?
For example: Migraine sufferers have to wait 6 months (or longer) before they can get a CAT scan. (unless they can afford it and pay for their own--too bad for the folks who depend on national healthcare).
2007-02-21 04:10:32 · 7 answers · asked by Truth B. Told ITS THE ECONOMY STUPID 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
abisynnia--yes it IS.
the grip-I asked a fair question; why can't you give a fair answer and not some elusive psychobabble?
2007-02-21 04:26:31 · update #1
pro-choice IS NOT PRO ABORTION.
The rest of your question doesn't really matter- but yeah, basic health care should not be such a luxury in supposedly the most 'developed' 'super power' of the world.
2007-02-21 04:17:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
This is what is called in formal logic a fallacy of "false dilemma," or "false alternatives." Your fallacy is that you are only presenting two possible alternatives. You are saying that if a person is both pro-choice and pro-national healthcare, then that person is either a) in favor of "the gov't making choices regarding your body," or b) not in favor of "the gov't making choices regarding your body."
If what you are trying to get across is that legalized abortion and national healthcare are bad, then present an argument proving your position, and watch out for logical fallacies!
ADDENDUM:
"the grip-I asked a fair question; why can't you give a fair answer and not some elusive psychobabble?"
I didn't make this up. If you don't believe me, ask someone you know who's taken Philosophy, or check out these links which describe what I am talking about. This will help you to see how your question is fallacious, and will also help you to craft more compelling arguments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_alternative
http://www.cambridgestudycenter.com/artilces/Wilson1.htm
2007-02-21 12:20:18 · answer #2 · answered by Thegrip 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have to agree with the underlying current of this question. It does expose a fundamental flaw in current liberal thinking. Because most liberals are prob-choice but also socialists with regards to health care. It is fundamentally incongrous that someone wants freedom for what to do with their body but at the same time would like the government to control how health care is provided.
as to your example migraine sufferers do not need CAT scans ever. But what you are saying is accurate as it is impossible to get a timely CAT scan in canada!!
2007-02-21 12:51:48 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am pro-choice and anti-socialized healthcare BECAUSE I believe the government should have NO say regarding my body or anyone else's.
2007-02-21 12:24:04 · answer #4 · answered by Michael E 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. I oppose it vigorously. At present, Canadians come to the US when they cannot get health care; if the US were to adopt the Canadian system, where could US citizens go?
2007-02-21 12:13:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
have you gotten healthcare and health insurance mixed up?
2007-02-25 10:57:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you're pro choice to murder your baby then you are also socialist.
2007-02-21 12:13:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋