The sorry saga of the NHS and my year undercover in hospitals

**Don** · 12-03-2010, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by DougieG

If it is unjust not to have it (my opinion is that it is) then the majority will is irrelevant, unless of course it is the will of the people who would benefit.

And what of the people who have and are satisfied with private insurance. What of the people in the majority who do not wish to be further taxed to pay for it? No, maybe in the UK your statement is justified, but not in the U.S. We threw off the yoke of King George's oppression just for that reason. We have representation and we choose to tell those reps NO.

I find my self in the strange position of having to justify a stance with which I basically disagree. Problem is I have this major commitment to the Constitution to which I swore an oath. I do not recall an expiration date on the oath.

**Major Sinic** · 12-03-2010, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Don

And what of the people who have and are satisfied with private insurance. What of the people in the majority who do not wish to be further taxed to pay for it? No, maybe in the UK your statement is justified, but not in the U.S. We threw off the yoke of King George's oppression just for that reason. We have representation and we choose to tell those reps NO.

I find my self in the strange position of having to justify a stance with which I basically disagree. Problem is I have this major commitment to the Constitution to which I swore an oath. I do not recall an expiration date on the oath.

It seems to me that whilst you personally might morally disagree with the majority view held by the citizens of the USA on this issue, your belief in and commitment to your country's principles of democracy counters your moral disapproval. I can accept this. Indeed in the UK most of us have to compromise our own convictions and morality on a regular basis, in order to try to live in peace and harmony within our own country.

However that does not alter my view that the American people's negative response to a cohesive national public health service system indicates a less caring society than we find in Europe. I suspect that if there were a referendum on whether to maintain, or not, a comprehensive national health service in the UK there would be an overwhelming majority, from all political persuasions, in favourof retaining it. But then I accept that we are all conditioned to a great extent by our upbringing and the traditions and conventions of the society we have known since birth.

**Don** · 12-03-2010, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by Major Sinic

It seems to me that whilst you personally might morally disagree with the majority view held by the citizens of the USA on this issue, your belief in and commitment to your country's principles of democracy counters your moral disapproval. I can accept this. Indeed in the UK most of us have to compromise our own convictions and morality on a regular basis, in order to try to live in peace and harmony within our own country.

Actually, I don't consider it a compromise. A compromise would be to accept it regardless of it's constitutionality. After many readings of the US Constitution I can not envision a situation arising, which is constitutional, that I would not support. The Constitution comes first. I am bound by my honor and duty to oppose any law or measure that is unconstitutional. All that being said, our representatives are not legally bound to vote the will of the people, although it is my view they are morally bound to do so. If they pass a universal health care bill despite the will of the people, baring the Supreme Court ruling it unconstitutional, I am honor/duty bound to comply.

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
--Daniel Webster

**pauli007001** · 12-03-2010, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by Major Sinic

It seems to me that whilst you personally might morally disagree with the majority view held by the citizens of the USA on this issue, your belief in and commitment to your country's principles of democracy counters your moral disapproval. I can accept this. Indeed in the UK most of us have to compromise our own convictions and morality on a regular basis, in order to try to live in peace and harmony within our own country.

However that does not alter my view that the American people's negative response to a cohesive national public health service system indicates a less caring society than we find in Europe. I suspect that if there were a referendum on whether to maintain, or not, a comprehensive national health service in the UK there would be an overwhelming majority, from all political persuasions, in favourof retaining it. But then I accept that we are all conditioned to a great extent by our upbringing and the traditions and conventions of the society we have known since birth.

The UK NHS is great for the UK, fine, yet the USA is quite happy with the status quo of our healthcare system not because of some viscious nastiness on the part of Americans but because they wish to preserve the quality healthcare available to all in the USA, despite propeganda claiming only the richest are given healthcare inthe USA.Odd how the most vocal haters of the USA are the ones who seem to wish an NHS type system on the USA.
For example, "Damned Uncaring Americans, They should suffer under socialised healthcare".

Now why should the rest of the world force their pain on the USA?Is it jealousy, we get great healthcare at a great cost availabe to all, how is that a bad thing, the only thing you can say about it is that it is not government controlled, which appears to be what the trest of the world meen when they say Quality. I guess Quality to the UN the EUssr and the haters of freedom actually meens government contolled.

The BBC offers Quality programming(Government controlled)

The NHS offers Quality Healthcare(government controlled)

Now it all becomes clear, it is about forcing socialism upon all, equating Quality with totalitarian policies, will we next be offered Quality work environments(Like Belsen or sachhausen)????