Posts
Senior citizens would be required, every five years, to have an "end of life" consultation, at which time it will be determined if society is better served by not keeping said persons alive. Like we've pointed out before, government-funded health care is simply not financially viable. So you have to cut costs somewhere, right? If the cost of keeping someone alive is too high, then society would be better off without them. You. Have. Got. To. Be. Kidding. Me.
So, according to Obama, we don't really know when life begins, but now we're presuming to know when it should end. Or better yet, the government will decide for us when our life is no longer serving the greater good of society. They get to decide who does and does not get the medical care they need. You better hope you don't need a medical procedure--even one you'd be willing to pay for--that your government deems not necessary or cost-effective.
I don't think I need to draw all the conclusions of how scary this would be. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."...including, apparently, your life.
This one's so shocking to me, I still have a hard time believing it's true. I mean, do we live in Nazi Germany or the Untied States of America???
9 comments:
Wow. I have to admit that I, the Canadian who enjoys universal health care (yes you Americans can all insert your gasp here) even finds this shocking!!! I think the reason is - other than the obvious - that it goes against any basis for universal health care in the first place - that all people deserve health care regardless of their income level or any perceived benefit or lack thereof to the society. The thought of a health care system that can decide who is worthy of their treatment is extremely disturbing... what about the physically disabled? or those with mental illness? In fact, it is so scary that I can hardly believe it's true either! Kacey - did you make this up to trick me? Because if you did I totally fell for it. You just wanted me to admit on your blog that I like our health care system! hehe
Thanks for the excellent post.
Cry out America!!!!
Call and e-mail every senator and representative and let your voice be heard. Our nation has been desensitized to death through abortion and now this bill is not about money or health care but instead about the evil of euthanasia. Each one of us can make a difference by letting our voice be heard and being diligent to cry out to the Lord for mercy and help in a great time of need.
You are t-double-o funny Marisa.:) Yes, my whole blog, from the beginning, has been strategically designed to get you admit your affinity for Canada's health care system to the whole blogosphere...or at least my droves of readers. Gottcha! Just kidding (obviously). You raise a good point. It's quite ironic, because it does indeed go against the very idea of providing UNIVERSAL health care, if it's not actually for everyone. Maybe I am wrong and simply misunderstood what I've been reading and hearing. Someone please correct me if this is not true!
I don't know where you heard this, but do you honestly believe it is true? What is your source? I think you need to apply a little more critical thinking to the things you hear about in the media. This is just a made up scare tactic.
Anonymous,
This isn't hard to confirm. Check out http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf. Specifically, page 426.
Thanks for putting this out there, Kacey. Most lawmakers don't even know this clause is in there because no one has bothered to read all 1018 pages of this piece-of-trash legislation.
People need to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and realize that government bureaucrats are going to determine who lives and who dies.
In the spirit of that last comment, do you have any links on where you got your info so people can see for themselves? I have a hard time believing that this is already 'part of the plan,' I thought it would take much more time to get to this point. :/
If it IS true I am almost glad. I don't think Americans, even very liberal ones, would be happy with this at all. The powers that be should have played their cards closer to their vest on this one. Has this been discussed on the news at all? I haven't been watching... reminds me of Hollywood... :/
wow i need to hit refresh before commenting! LOL thanks for the link Elizabeth I will look it up!
Not a big surprise there hasn't been a lot of press on this though... it's sure to attract unwanted attention.
Here is the text in question from the bill:
(E) An explanation by the practitioner of the
continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such services and supports that are available
under this title.
If you think that helping terminal cases tie off their loose ends and find hospices is the equivalent of the government deciding who gets to live and who has to die, than there is nothing I could possibly say to convince you otherwise. I would recommend that you apply a filter to everything you hear from Rush and Hannity or whoever it is you get your info from, because they distort the truth for entertainment purposes.
Anonymous,
Thank you for your recommendation to use critical thinking and to apply a filter. As you are choosing to remain faceless in this discussion, I have no idea if you know me or not, but I do attempt to "critically think" about the things I write. We may not agree, but that doesn't mean I'm not thinking. That being said, I'm not setting out to write a thesis, but a blog.
I have read much of the text of the bill, and these are the conclusions I've drawn. I'm not merely coming from the one line you quoted, but really from the bill as a whole. Government health care is just that--the government will control your health care. It's not just senior citizens that will be affected by this, but every single one of us. Once the government takes the place of private insurance companies, they will decide what treatments a person can and cannot receive. It's just that when it comes to senior citizens, the language is a little more drastic. Senior citizens, specifically, are discussed throughout the pages in the 400s.
Does it say explicitly that the government will end your life? No, of course not. But it does state explicitly that the government will play a large role in deciding what treatments are available to you as you age, and that the government will help you decide when to no longer prolong your life. And this, to me, IS opening the door to euthanasia. There are countries in Europe to which we can look for the logical conclusion of such legislation.
It's worrisome because there are so many stories of Canadians who come to America for health care they've either been denied or put on a waiting list to receive. In some cases, people would rather pay for a surgery or treatment they need rather than go without or wait until it's too late. And at least up until this point Canadians have had that option. But where will Americans be able to go for treatment if our country should go the same route?
Post a Comment