Based on answers to universal health care question, would many Christians oppose Social Security, Medicare...?

Question

... & Public Education, as well? (Never mind farm subsidies, public parks & forests, the space program, the National Institutes of Health, etc.)

Here's the question I was referring to:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvhOPO4m9hoQBhYSCjQ.Ag7sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070921143715AAX1rBc

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 1

Matthew 25:44-45
"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'"

Answer 2

They're not specificly defined in the Constitution. According to the Tenth Amendment, anything not specificly granted to the federal gov't or prohibited by it to the states should be left to the states and the people. That means, Medicare, Social Security, and Public Education should not be run by the federal gov't. If they should exist at all, the states should be in charge of those programs and the federal gov't should mind their own business. Farm subsidies should be handled by the states. Public parks and forests should also be handled by the states. The space program, far as I'm concerned, should be abolished. It's a waste of time and money. There are far more important things to research, such as cures for deadly diseases and ways to use renewable resources to decrease our dependence on fossil fuels. I don't know about the National Institutes of Health but private individuals could probably run it better than the gov't could. Did you know that the Supreme Court ruled the federal income tax unconstitutional after the Civil War? Shortly before WWI, they made an amendment to the Constitution to make it constitutional. If they'd abolish income tax, people in general could keep what they earn and they wouldn't need Social Security. And opposing universal healthcare is a libertarian philosophy, not necessarily a Christian one, although Christians do believe in personal responsibility, which universal healthcare would discourage.

Answer 3

"Wouldn't these programs exist at the beginning of American History if that is what is really meant by "General Welfare"?" Medicare, and universal health care were unnecessary. Your barber was your doctor. He would bleed you if oyu got sick. It didn't cost much. People didn't live long enough to need social security. You might want to study American history some day. It would help you understand things better. My 92 year old grandmother lives on social security. Perhaps we should get rid of it. She could get a job at a 7-11 to pay for her apartment at the retirement community and her medical care. "Adam B, the only reason is because of the technology has improved because of the free market advances." Most of those "free market" technological advances have taken place with medicare and social security in place. Also many medical advances and much research has happened thanks to government grants that you and your friends like to call "pork".

Answer 4

I'm not a Christian, so it may be none of my business, but I don't like the term "universal," and I like the term "single payer" even less. That means the taxpayers, who are not single, but millions of people. And putting our tax money into yet another bureaucracy that thinks of its primary purpose to be a job market for those who can't get a job in the private sector.

A federal program is the absolutely LEAST effective way to do anything. Second least effective is a state program. What we need, IMO, is for non-profits to pay the premiums for the indigent, or even set up insurance co-ops. We also need for health service costs to come down, way down. Some good healthy competition would do wonders.

The details are too time-consuming to go into here, but the basic concept is that we can indeed have less expensive health care if we get creative, and make it available to everyone through benefits employers provide (for their own reasons of wanting a healthy staff and for being able to compete with other employers for quality employees), and through non-profits and co-ops for the unemployed. Small, local efforts that don't have to get top-heavy with administrative costs.

Answer 5

People seem to take a brain vacation when it comes to realizing that Universal Health Care or affordable health care is a morality issue. The responses I saw to your last question kind of made my blood boil. These are the same people that are blindly supporting a war in Iraq because some have made into a holy war against Islam. We went from finding weapons of mass destruction to securing democracy in a part of the world that needs it. Hmmm... The funny thing is that some senior citizens have to choose between buying food or medication. I find it disturbing that so many are so close-minded.

Answer 6

It depends, I'm a libertarian and against universal healthcare. This doesn't mean every Christian is against healthcare, the religious left (there is one) is for it as a way of keeping up with the Gospels.

Answer 7

I think I read most people say this isn't religious in nature.

Righties tend to oppose anything that's good for the general populace and I guess most fundies are also righties but like all generalizations, its generally false.

Answer 8

As long as my taxes don't go higher, I don't care, but I wont pay more taxes to pay for the medical expenses for those who don't want to work and rather stay at home eating and watching TV. If they want health care, they should get a job and pay for it.

Answer 9

You forgot about bailing out bankrupt railroad companies.

Oh... and $320-million bridges to nowhere.

Answer 10

I appose nothing that is for the good of mankind.