[Steve_American]

@One Degree,
So, you do think that parental rights are so absolute that they can literally play Russian Roulette with their children's lives.
I rest my case.

[One Degree]

@One Degree,
So, you do think that parental rights are so absolute that they can literally play Russian Roulette with their children's lives.
I rest my case.

Yes, with the exception of local communities being necessary for civilization. Humans have never needed and still do not need experts to tell them the best way to live. They have survived just fine without it. The quality of our lives is not a matter of objectivity, but subjectivity.

[Steve_American]

Yes, with the exception of local communities being necessary for civilization. Humans have never needed and still do not need experts to tell them the best way to live. They have survived just fine without it. The quality of our lives is not a matter of objectivity, but subjectivity.

However, I was talking about their children.
I suppose there are a few cases where their child's life will not be worth living and so the parents can just kill them. Most Americans I think would not give them this right but the ancient Romans did give the father this right.
On the whole, giving the parents the legal right to forgo health insurance for their children so they can vacation in Florida is not going to fly with most Americans. For themselves, maybe; but not for their healthy children.

[One Degree]

However, I was talking about their children.
I suppose there are a few cases where their child's life will not be worth living and so the parents can just kill them. Most Americans I think would not give them this right but the ancient Romans did give the father this right.
On the whole, giving the parents the legal right to forgo health insurance for their children so they can vacation in Florida is not going to fly with most Americans. For themselves, maybe; but not for their healthy children.

That is our basic disagreement. I don’t think the decisions should be made by ‘most Americans’. We have this weird idea that cultural diversity is obtained by one rule for all. This is contradictory. Our laws are intended to protect our culture. A country with many cultures needs decentralization, not centralization. I don’t necessarily disagree with the decisions you think should be made. I only disagree with who should make them.

[Steve_American]

@One Degree,
So, you claim that the question of "When can a parent murder their child?" should be left to the parents and not be made by the community.
Yes, murder is an exaggeration. But, not by much IStM.
Again I rest my case.
.

[One Degree]

@One Degree,
So, you claim that the question of "When can a parent murder their child?" should be left to the parents and not be made by the community.
Yes, murder is an exaggeration. But, not by much IStM.
Again I rest my case.
.

No, I specifically said a community is necessary to make the decisions. However, the size of the community should be as small as practical to allow for different versions of what is right. Are you suggesting that there is never a time when murdering your child might not be merciful?
I was faced with a similar dilemma. My mother suffered terribly from cancer and begged me to kill her. I wanted to, but I thought about my children if the police found out what I did. I had intended to overdose her medications, but couldn’t risk it. The first thing the authorities did upon her death was inventory the remaining medication. Were our laws against murder ‘justice’ in this situation?

[Steve_American]

No, I specifically said a community is necessary to make the decisions. However, the size of the community should be as small as practical to allow for different versions of what is right. Are you suggesting that there is never a time when murdering your child might not be merciful?
I was faced with a similar dilemma. My mother suffered terribly from cancer and begged me to kill her. I wanted to, but I thought about my children if the police found out what I did. I had intended to overdose her medications, but couldn’t risk it. The first thing the authorities did upon her death was inventory the remaining medication. Were our laws against murder ‘justice’ in this situation?

Lurkers, note ---
1] I did say I thought that there are case where mercy killing a child is mercy.
Then he changed the subject again to his mother [i.e. not a child].
But, remember the question was about having health care provide to all and especially all children.
My words about economics show that the poor should not be charged for their care, IMHO.
.

[One Degree]

Lurkers, note ---
1] I did say I thought that there are case where mercy killing a child is mercy.
Then he changed the subject again to his mother [i.e. not a child].
But, remember the question was about having health care provide to all and especially all children.
My words about economics show that the poor should not be charged for their care, IMHO.
.

Translation. “I was unsuccessful in defending mandatory health care by accusing parents of being murderers. I now need others to console me by telling me @One Degree is a bad person then I can pretend I won a debate I lost.”

[Pants-of-dog]

I think taking your kids to the hospital so that they stay healthy is better than letting them die of a curable disease.

I think parents would agree with me.

I think the reason why parents in the USA sometimes do not take their kids to the hospital is because they cannot afford it. It is not a choice.

A public health care program would give them that choice.

[One Degree]

I think accusing every parent who is against mandatory healthcare of wanting to abuse or murder their children is only something very vile people would do. To make such accusations just to give the federal government control of our health care when they should not have any jurisdiction or input to begin with is beneath contempt.
It is not about murdering children. It is about who should make these decisions. But hey, why not do any vile thing I can think of to force others to do what I want?

[Pants-of-dog]

Since no one made that claim, this is a strawman.

[One Degree]

Since no one made that claim, this is a strawman.

Then apparently you skipped some of the discussion.

[Pants-of-dog]

Then who made that accusation?

[One Degree]

Then who made that accusation?

I am not in the mood for disingenuousness today. Do your own reading.

[Pants-of-dog]

If you cannot back up your claims, a political debate forum is not for you.

Back on topic, 70% of people in the USA support public health care.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-am ... ition.html

[One Degree]

If you cannot back up your claims, a political debate forum is not for you.

Back on topic, 70% of people in the USA support public health care.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/most-am ... ition.html

It comes from CNBC. Strike 1
You say ‘public’, not ‘federal’. Strike 2
That still leaves at least 30% of the population you want to force to do something they don’t want to. Strike 3

[Pants-of-dog]

It comes from CNBC. Strike 1

Poisoning the well is a logical fallacy.

You say ‘public’, not ‘federal’. Strike 2

No one ever discussed federal politics. So, strawman. Also a logical fallacy.

That still leaves at least 30% of the population you want to force to do something they don’t want to. Strike 3

I do not care.

[One Degree]

Poisoning the well is a logical fallacy.

So is the news media.

No one ever discussed federal politics. So, strawman. Also a logical fallacy.

So you are now arguing you do not support a national program?

I do not care.

I am not surprised you do not care about over 100 million people in your liberal utopia.

[Pants-of-dog]

So is the news media.

The news media is a logical fallacy?

So you are now arguing you do not support a national program?

Medicare in Canada is not a federal program. Each province (those are kind of like states) has its own public health care program, but I think a lot of the funding comes from the federal government.

I am not surprised you do not care about over 100 million people in your liberal utopia.

And you do not care about the 70% that do want it. I am not surprised about that either.

So, why should we ignore the wishes of the majority?

[One Degree]

You already know my answer. The more local a decision, the more people who get what they want.