3 ms·

There are absolute and relative rights. Absolute rights are based on absolute ethical frameworks, while relative rights are constrained by the resources availab

There are absolute and relative rights. Absolute rights are based on absolute ethical frameworks, while relative rights are constrained by the resources available. For example, I don't have the absolute right to life, but only a relative one. No one can provide for that. In fact, I am guaranteed to die someday. I do have the absolute right not to be murdered (and to expect society to punish those who deprive that right). People in a society have a relative right to food, shelther, and medical care. If the resources exist, they have a right to them. If they don't, then that "right" is meaningless. Every American has the right to adequate medical care without the life-destroying mess of individual medical billing (as opposed to the taxpayer-funded system that First World countries use) but not every American has the right to a liver transplant, because livers are scarce.

igorhvr 17y ago
> Every American has the right to adequate medical care without the life-destroying mess of individual medical billing Bullshit. Someone has to pay for the adequate medical care - and it should be the person receiving it. If you want protection against "individual medical billing", you can always buy insurance - if you don't do that, you should be willing to face the consequences. To put another way: the only way of ensuring "adequate medical care" to someone without the means or unwilling to pay for it is to force other people to pay for it. Do you think this makes sense? Let's say I eat healthy food (which most people don't), make exercise every single day (most people don't) and pay (insurance) for proper medical care (most people don't). Why, exactly, should I be forced to pay when someone that eats crap every day, spends 4 hours a day on Television, does no exercise at all, etc, etc, gets sick? And even that is besides the point - even if a perfectly healthy person gets hit by a car - why should I be forced to pay for it?

igorhvr 17y ago

> Every American has the right to adequate medical care without the life-destroying mess of individual medical billing Bullshit. Someone has to pay for the adequate medical care - and it should be the person receiving it. If you want protection against "individual medical billing", you can always buy insurance - if you don't do that, you should be willing to face the consequences. To put another way: the only way of ensuring "adequate medical care" to someone without the means or unwilling to pay for it is to force other people to pay for it. Do you think this makes sense? Let's say I eat healthy food (which most people don't), make exercise every single day (most people don't) and pay (insurance) for proper medical care (most people don't). Why, exactly, should I be forced to pay when someone that eats crap every day, spends 4 hours a day on Television, does no exercise at all, etc, etc, gets sick? And even that is besides the point - even if a perfectly healthy person gets hit by a car - why should I be forced to pay for it?