Birth defects – should taxpayers subsidize consequences of FLDS practice of first-cousin marriages?

[likearock 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges

And that translates to a universal right to health care, how?

Obviously modern health care is a product of our society, and all in our society should share what it has to offer.

Lot's of things are products of our society. That doesn't give us a right to them. You could use that logic to say that liberty gives you the right to personally address Congress every day. After all, Congress is a product of our society, right?

Quote

Do you not think that we have an obligation to provide the most basic liberties to those who cannot afford these benefits?

Health care is not a liberty, it's a commodity that we need to keep us alive and healthy. There may or may not be a "right" to health care, but you're twisting the language so ridiculously that even someone who might agree with you can see it's not worth the effort.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges

And that translates to a universal right to health care, how?

Obviously modern health care is a product of our society, and all in our society should share what it has to offer.

Lot's of things are products of our society. That doesn't give us a right to them. You could use that logic to say that liberty gives you the right to personally address Congress every day. After all, Congress is a product of our society, right?

Quote

Do you not think that we have an obligation to provide the most basic liberties to those who cannot afford these benefits?

Health care is not a liberty, it's a commodity that we need to keep us alive and healthy. There may or may not be a "right" to health care, but you're twisting the language so ridiculously that even someone who might agree with you can see it's not worth the effort.

HAHAHAHAHA!!!! I am twisting language? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! That is funny!!!!!

So you feel as though you have no obligation or responsibility to help your fellow human in need of medical attention. You will pass sick and dying people on the street, injured people from car accidents, skydiving accidents, mentally deficient people who need help, people who simply have no insurance, people who had good insurance but because they were sick, they lost their jobs and lost their coverage, old people who need Hospice or home nurse care, young and old people who need long term care……..whatever and however many different ways a person falls into a pit of medical need and you, as a fellow human being and citizen of the most powerful country that has ever been on the face of this planet, have nothing to say other than, too bad you cannot afford the latest price of the “commodity”????????????????? This may very well be your mode of thought, but not mine. And the language I use is not twisted, not by a long shot. The meaning is right there where you showed me, my man on the street.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[likearock 2]

Thanks for proving my point.
Let's see. We started out arguing whether the definition of the word "liberty" included a right to health care, which you couldn't win on the merits.

So instead you simply assume you know exactly how I feel in terms of whether or not there should be universal health care. Here's a clue: you don't know my opinion on that because I haven't given it.

I don't know you, cloudseeker2001, but I do know that the tendency to insist you know what's going on in the mind of someone else better than they themselves do is the mark of a seriously co-dependent and abusive personality.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

Quote

Thanks for proving my point.

Any time you need your opinion or complex concept illustrated, you can always count on my services! I am just that nice of a guy.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

This reminds me of the case from a couple of years ago, when the UDV church got into trouble for importing hoasca tea (which contains DMT, a Schedule I drug) into the US.

They argued that it was used for religious purposes and that to confiscate their tea violated their rights to religious freedom. The case ended up at the Supreme Court, and the Court decided that the UDV could continue using their tea.

I’m not familiar/haven't run across the case you cite.
Do you know its name?

Quote

I am sort of wondering if the FLDS case will end up at the Supreme Court. What exactly does "religious freedom" give people the right to do? If I start my own religion, can I ignore certain aspects of the law and get away with it if I say that it is necessary for practicing my religion?

In short, no.

A SCOTUS ruling from 1878 holds that the First Amendment does not protect the practice polygamy.

In 1878, in Reynolds v. United States, the US Supreme Court addressed whether the federal law that prohibited polygamy in the territories was constitutional under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. The case was brought by a bigamous Mormon man (this was before the larger LDS church, which no longer condones polygamy, changed its standard, and before the FLDS broke away from the LDS) who claimed that his religious beliefs mandated polygamy (this is the same argument that the FLDS makes today) and therefore the law was in violation of his right to the free exercise of his beliefs. The SCOTUS soundly rejected the polygamist's challenge (8-1); the lone dissenting Justice wrote not on the Free Exercise argument, but against introduction of testimony made by the 2nd wife that was contested.

In the SCOTUS opinion, delivered by the Chief Justice, it was determined:

“The inquiry is not as to the power of Congress to prescribe criminal laws for the Territories, but as to the guilt of one who knowingly violates a law which has been properly enacted, if he entertains a religious belief that the law is wrong.

“Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territories which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation. Religious freedom is guaranteed everywhere throughout the United States, so far as congressional interference is concerned. The question to be determined is, whether the law now under consideration comes within this prohibition.

“Suppose one believed that human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government under which he lived could not interfere to prevent a sacrifice? Or if a wife religiously believed it was her duty to burn herself upon the funeral pile of her dead husband, would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into practice?

“So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.”

The most recent case (as far as I can tell) in which the SCOTUS reaffirmed the principles of Reynolds v. United States was in the 1990 case Employment Division v. Smith. The SCOTUS found that the claim of two individual that their religious belief compelled them to use peyote did not prevent the State of Orgegon from denying them unemployment benefits on the grounds that they had engaged in illegal drug use, just as it would any other drug law violator.

Literally (not figuratively) hundreds of cases, at the Supreme Court and Circuit Courts, have re-affirmed and/or cited Reynolds v. U.S..

Additionally, polygamy is explicitly prohibited by the State Constitution of both Utah and Arizona. Texas law prohibits polygamy and the marriage of girls under 16.

Btw: the secular pro-polygamy community (never knew there was an organized one) that emphasizes *consenting adults* has criticized the FLDS, e.g., here & here.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

It also implies a willingness to be responsible for the negative consequences of one's actions.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

So you feel as though you have no obligation or responsibility to help your fellow human in need of medical attention.

Yes. Thanks for clarifying.

Quote

You will pass sick and dying people on the street, injured people from car accidents, skydiving accidents, mentally deficient people who need help

Yes. I used drive through LA's skid row every day.

And - why would someone skydive without insurance? "I had 150 jumps last year, but my family and I cannot afford insurance."

Quote

too bad you cannot afford the latest price of the “commodity”?????????????????

Yep. Kinda like kids. If you can't feed em, don't breed em.

Quote

This may very well be your mode of thought, but not mine.

Cool. Put your money where your mouth is, Mack. I happen to know a couple of people who could really use some help right now. Pm me with your information, and I'll put you in touch with them so that you can help them out.

Will you help them? Either you will help these people or you are being dishonest. If you are being dishonest, I will refer you to the democratic and republican party.

When was the last time YOU helped a sick person that you did not know?
When was the last time YOU took in a homeless person from the street?

Let me guess - in your whole life, no more than twice. IT should be an everyday thing. Instead of skydiving, why not insure a family of four? Then you'd be content with the knowledge that you are doing something positive and actually putting your money where your mouth is.

But let me guess - you haven't EVER paid for some stranger's insurance. You want someone ELSE to do it, right? Yeah. Someone ELSE can do it. You'll live your life being angry at all those things nobody else will do.

Have you thought about helping them yourself? You know, being an example? Setting the example?

I'm serious about you helping people. YOU do it. Come on. Let's see you do it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[thirdworld19 0]

Quote

Cool. Put your money where your mouth is, Mack. I happen to know a couple of people who could really use some help right now. Pm me with your information, and I'll put you in touch with them so that you can help them out.

Will you help them? Either you will help these people or you are being dishonest. If you are being dishonest, I will refer you to the democratic and republican party.

Here here! Very well said.

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

So you feel as though you have no obligation or responsibility to help your fellow human in need of medical attention.

No. I don't feel as if I have an obligation or responsibility to help people in need. But I do it anyway.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

I’m not familiar/haven't run across the case you cite.
Do you know its name?

Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao De Vegetal

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

It also implies a willingness to be responsible for the negative consequences of one's actions.

And this applies to NATIONS too.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It also implies a willingness to be responsible for the negative consequences of one's actions.

And this applies to NATIONS too.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[cloudseeker2001 0]

You sound more like an Elitist than a Libertarian, Babe.
Your dissection of my post is far short of what was implied. I find your attempt to pull me into you argument elementary at best. You have completely missed my point and you have no idea what I do on a personal level to make the world we live in more humane, nor do I have a need to explain myself. My actions do speak, whether your ears are there to hear or not. Simply posting this reply is a fly on the horses’ ass.

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Cool. Put your money where your mouth is, Mack. I happen to know a couple of people who could really use some help right now. Pm me with your information, and I'll put you in touch with them so that you can help them out.

Wow!
I was going to write exactly the same thing. Thank you for saving me some time :)
*applauds*

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[shropshire 0]

<When was the last time YOU took in a homeless person from the street?>>

In the U.K, we do it daily - through out National Health Service... in this way the load is spread (and rightly so - for us over here, at least).

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

<When was the last time YOU took in a homeless person from the street?>>

In the U.K, we do it daily - through out National Health Service... in this way the load is spread (and rightly so - for us over here, at least).

Well, you should do more. I know for a fact that there are homeless in England. Go out and find some and take them in and provide for them. Help assist a person with a tax burden that has trouble making payments.

What are YOU going to do? Not the government (the "someone else" I mentioned.)

What are YOU yourself going to do?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

The government doing something IS me doing something... It's my money and I have zero problem them spending on good causes. In fact, if thete didn't waste it brown nosing to your government, then WE could do a lot more.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[lawrocket 3]

Well, MY money is goign toward taking care of people. MY money pays for the emergency room visits for the uninsured and insolvent. MY money pays for the homeless shelters. MY money pays for the disability payments made by the state.

So, what you are saying is that it is not your "responsibility." It is the government's "responsibility." And this means that I care as much as you care.

In fact, ANYONE who pays taxes cares under your system.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

When it becomes more important that the "load is spread" than actually directly helping someone, that's where that political line is crossed and these conversations go over heads. No common ground there in what it means to give because they are two mutually exclusive definitions of "giving".

I care a LOT. The other day, I went up to a rich guy and clubbed him on the head. Then I gave his wallet to a homeless guy hanging out by the liquor store. It really felt good to be part of constructive charity and knowing that at least one guy also had the good fortune to pay his fair share. I felt so good about it, I kept a fin for myself so I could buy gas to drive around and look for another guy to club - you gotta be sure to spread the load so everyoone gets to give.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[shropshire 0]

<>

aye, that's correct... gives us a nice warm feeling without getting our hands dirty.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

The government doing something IS me doing something... It's my money and I have zero problem them spending on good causes. In fact, if thete didn't waste it brown nosing to your government, then WE could do a lot more.

Is it a good cause to bail people out from their own harmful behaviors resulting from their irrational beliefs in invisible supernatural beings?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I care a LOT. The other day, I went up to a rich guy and clubbed him on the head. Then I gave his wallet to a homeless guy hanging out by the liquor store. It really felt good to be part of constructive charity and knowing that at least one guy also had the good fortune to pay his fair share. I felt so good about it, I kept a fin for myself so I could buy gas to drive around and look for another guy to club - you gotta be sure to spread the load so everyoone gets to give.

Good job. Now the poor guy gets the money, which probably would have been his anyway if the rich guy hadn't shut down the factory and shipped it to China. And the rich guy gets to report the loss on his taxes which may be just enough to knock his liability down below zero percent. And if his accountant is any good, he'll get him a government subsidy to not only replace the wallet and the cash (including potential earnings on that money) but also an all expense paid trip on a government plane so that he can shop for the replacement. But not to worry. This is all possible of course because of the rider on the omnibus spending bill under the title of "interim relief stimulus for freedom, patriotism, honor and fairness".

And make sure that next time make sure you at least keep a sawbuck for yourself. You can't cruise very far on a fin these days.

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Quote

The government doing something IS me doing something... It's my money and I have zero problem them spending on good causes. In fact, if thete didn't waste it brown nosing to your government, then WE could do a lot more.

Is it a good cause to bail people out from their own harmful behaviors resulting from their irrational beliefs in invisible supernatural beings?

Yes. In the same waty that it's a good cause to save people from themselves, who Smoke, drink take drugs etc..

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[cloudseeker2001 0]

In fact, ANYONE who pays taxes cares under your system.

Congrats!!!!!!! That is the point!!!!!!!!

"Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance,
others mean and rueful of the western dream"

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The government doing something IS me doing something... It's my money and I have zero problem them spending on good causes. In fact, if thete didn't waste it brown nosing to your government, then WE could do a lot more.

Is it a good cause to bail people out from their own harmful behaviors resulting from their irrational beliefs in invisible supernatural beings?

Yes. In the same waty that it's a good cause to save people from themselves, who Smoke, drink take drugs etc..

I don't think it's a good cause to save people from smoking, drinking or drugs. If they want to fuck themselves up and OD on cocaine. I will not get in their way. I won't help them, but I won't go out of my way to stop them.