Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 72 of 176

Thread: Oral Arguments

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Oral Arguments



    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    No, you're still missing my point. A bible has no intrinsic value. Comparing it to health insurance is comparing a need to a luxury. There is a good reason to require people to have insurance, you can argue whether its a good enough reason to make it a law, but there is a good reason. There is no good reason to make everyone buy an old book.
    I think you're taking the example of a bible to literally. The example was used to make a point.

    Forcing someone to buy something regardless of whether you believe it's good for you or not, violates personal freedom.




  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,639

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    No, you're still missing my point. A bible has no intrinsic value.
    People of devout faith would disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    Comparing it to health insurance is comparing a need to a luxury. There is a good reason to require people to have insurance, you can argue whether its a good enough reason to make it a law, but there is a good reason. There is no good reason to make everyone buy an old book.
    People of devout faith would argue there is a good reason to have the Bible.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  3. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,639

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    I think you're taking the example of a bible to literally. The example was used to make a point.

    Forcing someone to buy something regardless of whether you believe it's good for you or not, violates personal freedom.
    Exactly.

    It boils down to individual freedom v. governmental control.

    It's the forcing of one person's values upon another. But the side doing the forcing have a (D) after their name, so their intentions are assumed to be honorable by that side.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    11,126
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Oral Arguments

    It can be forcing you to buy anything. That's the point Roberts made the first day - next the gov't will force you to buy an electric car or to eat health foods like brocolli. You can name any items.

    That is what the communists do.

    Many Christians don't even take the Bible to church anymore. Everything is
    posted on huge video screens now including the words of the songs. There's
    no more Bibles or hymn books.

    Many if not most Christians have never read the Bible from cover to cover and can't even name 3 of the 10 Commandments nor can they name the first book of the new testament. No, it wasn't Mathew. Less than 10% have
    ever told anyone about Christ and less than 5% have ever led
    anyone to Christ.
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 03-28-2012 at 11:13 AM.
    Pic of a natural act: UBER RAVENS FAN AND HISTORIAN GURU. THE PAST IS NOT DEAD, IN FACT, IT IS NOT EVEN PAST.' WILLIAM FAULKNER.




  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    Exactly.

    It boils down to individual freedom v. governmental control.

    It's the forcing of one person's values upon another. But the side doing the forcing have a (D) after their name, so their intentions are assumed to be honorable by that side.
    No it doesn't. Your bible to insurance analogy lacks what should have been the essential argument made by Verrilli yesterday which for some odd reason he struggled.

    1. People choosing not to buy bibles doesn't lead to $1000.00 premium paid by all of us each year leading to somewhere between 50 billion and 500 billion a year absorbed by the country depending on the study you cite.

    2. People not buying bibles doesn't affect the price of bibles to a degree that their price will double in the next several years.

    3. The cost of bibles doesn't represent 17% of the nation's GDP

    4. People not buying bibles doesn't lead to 50,000 unnessesary deaths a year.


    You can feel free to fill in broccoli, cell phones, gm cars etc to the analogy and they all severely fail to address the COMMERCE concerns of the individual mandate and the uninsured. I get it that you don't understand this but how does Verrilli not make this obvious point?

    This is was why Kennedy mentioned the uniqueness of this case vs. broccoli and cell phones as well as where Kennedy and/or Roberts will find their "limiting principle".

    What is infuriating to people like myself who actually read about healthcare on a regular basis is how someone like yourself, who can get on here and challenge (bluster) the "complexity" of someone's thought by yourself bulleting four legal arguments to be presented, which by the way, any 8th grader could gleem from the front page of the USA Today in less time than it takes to take a dump, yet you miserably fail at understanding what is really being debated here. It has zero to do with your ideological need to feel "free" but has more to deal with bending the cost curve of something we all use, healthcare, to a reasonable level.

    Yet you think forcing people to buy bibles is equivalent. If you guys really want to know what will lead to the eventual decline of America, I don't know if there is an clearer example than this healthcare debate and how misinformed, uninformed and just plain ignorant some people are.
    Last edited by Galen Sevinne; 03-28-2012 at 11:18 AM.








  6. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne View Post
    Yet you think forcing people to buy bibles is equivalent. If you guys really want to know what will lead to the eventual decline of America, I don't know if there is an clearer example than this healthcare debate and how misinformed, uninformed and just plain ignorant some people are.
    No one is arguing that there aren't current flaws with the healthcare, health insurance system. Just that this bill is not the solution, especially when overtime it will do away with the private insurance market. And don't EVEN pretend that's not the goal or you wouldn't be for that.




  7. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    21,639

    Re: Oral Arguments

    The "you're to stupid to understand this" line from our resident narcissist again ....

    I get a giggle every time.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    No one is arguing that there aren't current flaws with the healthcare, health insurance system. Just that this bill is not the solution, especially when overtime it will do away with the private insurance market. And don't EVEN pretend that's not the goal or you wouldn't be for that.
    Im all in for single payor for sure. I can't help but think Verilli's lame performance has something to do with the intent to lose the mandate leading to medicare for all. I know that sounds crazy but for someone as brigth as he is to stumble in the broccoli analogy blows me away.








  9. #69
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    The "you're to stupid to understand this" line from our resident narcissist again ....

    I get a giggle every time.
    I think the word is "too" but not to keep correcting you. Additionally, pointing out the documented ignorance of an individual doesn't fit DSM criteria for narcissim.

    Finally you are the one that always start this shit with people. You should be careful criticizing the "complexity" of someone's thought when you have historically been not much more than simple. If you can't take it than play elsewhere.








  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,200

    Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne View Post
    Im all in for single payor for sure. I can't help but think Verilli's lame performance has something to do with the intent to lose the mandate leading to medicare for all. I know that sounds crazy but for someone as brigth as he is to stumble in the broccoli analogy blows me away.
    That may be, but it could also be how do you defend the indefensible?

    Sorry Galen, the broccoli cell phone analogy, all apply, if the government can say, you're going to need healthcare eventually regardless of whether you can afford to pay out of pocket or not, must by health insurance, they can tell you to buy anything cause at some point you're going to anyway.

    Whether or not the SCOUTS agrees with that and or agrees the mandate can't be severed is another story.




  11. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,015
    Then he should have used an example that is actually comparable. He drew a direct equivalency between health insurance and a bible when there is none. Is there some actual service that people could use that isn't mandatory. Car insurance? Nope. Renter's insurance? Nope. I'm being honest, I can't think of many vital services we get to opt out of like health insurance.

    Sorry for the delay. While I was typing this I got attacked by my dead beat brother in law. I'm off to the emergency room. Glad I have health insurance. <- Not a joke. Seriously just got my eye gouged by a deadbeat relative. Now I know how BC's wallet feels around his sister in law.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  12. Re: Oral Arguments

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne View Post
    1. People choosing not to buy bibles doesn't lead to $1000.00 premium paid by all of us each year leading to somewhere between 50 billion and 500 billion a year absorbed by the country depending on the study you cite.

    It has zero to do with your ideological need to feel "free" but has more to deal with bending the cost curve of something we all use, healthcare, to a reasonable level.

    Yet you think forcing people to buy bibles is equivalent. If you guys really want to know what will lead to the eventual decline of America, I don't know if there is an clearer example than this healthcare debate and how misinformed, uninformed and just plain ignorant some people are.
    So who's to say that the government won't force us to buy electric cars to cut down on emissions to help our health situation?
    Who's to say the government won't force us to buy products that only fit within the criteria they set down as being healthy or manufactured by plants, etc. that fall within their guidelines of environmental contamination because that could effect our health?

    There's a whole hoist a things that could be brought into this equation if this pandoras box is opened.

    You're concerned about the amount of money our private insurance is going to cost us if we don't pass this bill?

    Is there stuff in this bill prohibiting insurance companys from raising their premiums?

    Who's to stop them from going out of business forcing everybody to take part in the governments plan?

    How much freakin' money in taxes is this going to cost me that I'm now saving (in your eyes) in my insurance premium?

    You really think the government can anticipate how much money this will cost?

    How the hell do they know how many people are out there in need, and what those peoples issues are?

    What about all the newborns that come into the country by parents that don't have insurance that now need healthcare?

    Who's to say the government won't borrow money from the pool of tax money designated for this program and screw it up? (see social security)

    There's a shit load of unknowns and what ifs involved here that could (and probably would) backfire from this that is impossible to forecast or account for financially.

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    No one is arguing that there aren't current flaws with the healthcare, health insurance system. Just that this bill is not the solution, especially when overtime it will do away with the private insurance market. And don't EVEN pretend that's not the goal or you wouldn't be for that.
    No doubt!!

    There's a shit load wrong with the healthcare system including rising costs which seems to be proponents of the bills biggest concerns.

    But trying to force their alternative onto us is asking for trouble and unaccounted for problems.
    Will Die A Ravens Fan!!




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland