Letter to the Editor: Obama health care plan not a violation of personal liberties

In response to the two, largely identical, letters to the Lanthorn letters editor, by Casey Vandenberg, a Philosophy sophomore, published on March 15 and 22, arguing that the Affordable Health Care Act (AHC), often called disrespectfully “Obamacare,” “violates the personal liberties” of the American people, I would like to disagree and stress that the universal, humane, and profoundly rational health protection is, and should be, a universal human right. It is an ideal of the entire world population, an ideal destroyed by greed, political stubbornness of the few extremely privileged and their political and media mercenaries.

In his two, identical, letters, Casey uses the word “liberty” full 24 times and accuses the “Obamacare” of forcing the unwilling “consumers” of the health care services in the USA to buy the “product” they do not want. What Casey does not say is that these unwilling consumers do use these services, in extremely large numbers, when they need them, as a rule in the very expensive, often low-quality, and understaffed Emergency Rooms (ER), all over the USA. When it comes to paying their medical bills, these “heroic defenders” of our “personal liberties” pass these bills to the rest of us, the “cowards” and the “idiots,” who are “enslaved” by paying our own health insurance. This mechanism is very simple: Our 50 States and our Federal Government cannot allow these parasitical “lovers of liberty” to die or become hopeless invalids, when they need medical care. Consequently, because of these irresponsible “heroes,” who hate the social and governmental mandates, especially the horrible “Obamacare,” all our insurance policies are significantly higher. We the People have to save them from their arrogant and politically indoctrinated selves! Such a negative situation can be ideologically supported only by the extreme libertarians or anarchists. Or perhaps by some sophomore students of philosophy? (See the meaning of the word “sophomore” and “sophomoric” — its Greek root!)

It is important to stress that the AHC Act has already produced some remarkable positive results, which are obvious to all the honest US citizens, and, if allowed to survive, by our, rather unreliable and often undeniably partisan, US Supreme Court, it may improve significantly the health situation in the USA, the situation which is today shamefully low for this technologically and culturally highly developed country. See the facts online!

As Casey’s “argument” is based exclusively on the idea that the AHC “violates personal liberties,” I am offering here a short, very selective, list of such “violations” that we all accept as normal and beneficial to the overall success of our country:

1) Paying our federal and state taxes; 2) Having very little, or no, say about how the tax money is spent; 3) Registering one’s car and paying car insurance; 4) Having a driver’s license and special ID’s (passports), when traveling abroad; 5) Being inspected/“frisked” at the airports and other high-security venues, etc.

The list is literally huge, as every normal society needs numerous rules, laws, and mandates, in order to function properly and smoothly. Casey, somehow, forgets all these mandates and selects the “Obamacare” as the biggest danger to our, largely clearly defined, American liberties. I find such a an attitude disingenuous, based on sophistry, i.e., verbal manipulation, and based on the several philosophically false premises. Fortunately, Casey has two more years of study, to refine his philosophical arguments and techniques. Let me conclude by saying a couple of words in favor of the much maligned AHC, hoping that reason will prevail and that the year 2014 will see its full implementation: Prevention is far better and cheaper than late cure! A healthier population works better and lives better! The Government is willing and ready to pay health insurance to those, who, because of the highly visible social injustice and inequality in this country, find themselves unemployed, homeless, unable to pay either the insurance or their taxes, in short, who belong to the ever-increasing US poor population. As for the stubborn and indoctrinated social parasites, who do have enough money, but decline such help, and still want to use their community health and social services, capitalism is very clear about their “destiny”: We are building this great country together and we cannot demand exemption from our duties. After all, it is to be hoped that we are collectively “our brothers’ keepers” and not the selfish, politically motivated, loners and misfits. Too big a burden, Casey? The time for “oil change”?