Jesus would tell us to stop being stupid. no smoking (cancer), no drinking in excess (liver disease), no eating in excess (high blood pressure, heart disease), no bathing in the sun (skin cancer). no prostitution (STD's), no man on man sex (fecal bacteria, AIDS), no eating without first washing hands ( infection, flu), no assisted suicide for the elderly, no abortions. no killing, raping, stabbing, hurting your neighbor. We could afford the needed healthcare if people understood his example.
You forgot to mention NO WAR, NO Capital punishment, No Guantanamo, NO Police Brutality, No Exploitation of Third World Countries, No Siege of Gaza by the US, Israel and Egypt. I am sure Jesus would have comments about that too, since it is alleged he LOVES the Children of the world. I am sure you meant to mention these.
No i did not mention anything not related to the original post, which concerns healthcare in the U.S. You will never get very far in politics if you cant stay on topic. Maybe you should change your tag to franksADDpolitics. Dont worry, with healthcare passing, you can get that ADD checked out and get a few medications for it. Then when the side effects kick in, you can get some more medicines to counteract the side effects. Another sucker for the pharmaceutical companies.
You do have a point Guantanamo, Gaza and Exploitation of third world countries. But war does affect the health of American soldiers coming back maimed or dead from war. You correctly point out some risky behaviors. You fail to point out it is promiscuous sex in both heterosexuals and unprotected sex that is the problem not the way one engages in sex. This video, I assume is advocating the Single Payer health Plan but does not make that clear. What is your position on that Plan?
You are correct in my missing promiscuous hetero's. I think they are stupid too. Unprotected sex is even more stupid. However, dont dismiss homo sex too easily. Fecal bacteria is transferred very easily to bedding and shower floors and causes many illnesses. Its just very unsanitary. If your body wanted you to use this area for sex instead of a simple waste chute, your body would have made provisions for it. Refer to my next post in answer to your question...
I doubt there are few people that have not done oral sex, yet I can't think of a better way to get an e-coli infection, since one is licking just adjacent to the anus. One could argue that the tongue was made to speak, aid in eating and swallowing but try to convince the public not to engage in oral sex. I guess others could argue that the lips were made only for speaking and not for kissing. If a woman, had cancer and had to have her vagina removed would you preach to her, "NO ANAL SEX?"
When my government starts to suggest I somehow have to pay tax for roy's triple bypass for eating too much or anna's new lung for smoking, or for your infections because you like anal, I just cant buy into it. We need to take responsibility for our own health. I would gladly buy into any national plan that covers all of the non controllable health issues. So, live how you want. But dont ask me to pay for it when it doesnt work out for you.
Boscoe you sound intellectually honest, so I will work with that assumption. Suppose you and I were in charge of developing a health care plan for the US. I agreed, we were not going to cover anyone that did not drink, 8-10 glasses of water, smoked, that ate too much, that did not excercise 3 times a week at least a half hour a day. did not eat adaquate amounts from the designated food groups and no anal sex or no un protected sex. But also outlawed profit on health care, would you back it?
That does it - I'm convinced that you're being satirical and playing a game with me. No one could possible write what you just wrote and be serious/honest. It's such a shame too - I'm sure that when you tell the truth about something like PNAC causing the Iraq war, people end up not believing you because you're hysterically irrational on other topics. Here again I suggest that Gabriel Kolko book, but I'm starting to wonder if you even read. You embarrass philosophy. You embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone Libertarianism is very much like the PNAC, both claim to have elitist self-grandiose claims of privileges over and above the "mob rule" of Constitutional voting.
No, libertarianism gives "corporate personhood" to NO ONE. Here again, you have an extremely shallow perspective on the matter based on a caricature of the philosophy. You know absolutely nothing about it. Further, your claim that the constitution is the antithesis of libertarianism is hilarious - the American revolution was very much a libertarian war spurned by libertarian philosophy and grievances. Perhaps my suggestion that you actually read books wasn't an empty insult?
EsotericThrone You insult our Founding Fathers. You have already distanced yourself (off the deep end, i might add) from the Constitution, human and civil rights, voting, rule of law, and God's commandments to love thy neighbor . Instead of reading treasonous anarchist elitist books, I recommend that you take a basic Civics course.
Yank - an earnest suggestion - Gabriel Kolko is an amazing new left historian. Read his book "The Triumph of Conservatism". He details that the progressive era in the United States, popularly thought of as a boon for liberal / progressive politics, was actually a series of processes in which elites cartelized their industries via using government to enforce the cartel. If you read that book, again, written by a leftist historian, you'll better understand my position.
What are you talking about? Because it has throne in it? Do you think that means I want to be someone's king? ... hahahahahahahaha. Comon man/gal, you have no idea what my handle means. It certainly has nothing to do with politics, or even other people. Wow. This is amazing.
"EsotericThrone" is a reference to the immense personal struggle involved in self actualization. "Esoteric" is there because achieving this actualization is very difficult and involves a complex and confusing process of self-growth. The word "throne" is there as a metaphor - The throne of selfhood.. IE having a measure of self-discipline and refusing to allow circumstances to determine your actions. It is about personal growth, and it is insulting that you have attacked me on this,
EsotericThrone wow, that was a very convoluted non-definition of both words. You may think you can insult our intelligence with such balderdash, but honestly, "the mob" out here does know that our human rights override your "privileges".
Corporatists are NEVER libertarians because they REQUIRE THE STATE to exploit others. Again, you have absolutely no idea what libertarianism actually is, and, as you have demonstrated throughout this conversation, have extremely shallow perspectives on the matter based on a caricature of the philosophy.
The cognitive dissonance of "libertarianism" never ceases to appall and bemuse me , by forcing people not to vote & by spiting human dignity and rights, and yet the rest of us peons are supposed to accept these elite anarchist dogmas "voluntarily".
What in the world are you talking about? Libertarianism is the utter and absolute absence of force. You can vote all you want, but you may not COERCE ME or others who do not wish to be a part of your extortion racket. (Government). Do you understand? I'm not forcing you to do anything EXCEPT acknowledge the right of others to not be forced by YOU as well. Basic shit.
EsotericThrone Libertarianism is the elitists' dream world, a political/economic/social ideology of rule by men (usually with money) , not rule of law. Libertarians constantly lie about this primary edict of libertarianism. Libertarianism aligns itself with uncivilized & prehistorical Law of the Jungle mentality. Libertarianism is merely an elitist's desire to throw off the "shackles" of the Constitution of WE THE PEOPLE, and to go back in time before one man/one vote.
Further, how am I spiting human dignity and rights? I'm doing precisely the opposite. You however, by constantly growing the power of the corporatist state at the expense of the human individual, are clearly a tool in the hand of those who would indeed "spite human dignity and rights".
EsotericThrone you have already stated you are AGAINST the right to vote (classic libertarianism). Gave you enuf rope and you already used it up. Too late to back paddle now.
EsotericThrone On the contrary, Libertarianism is the HAVEN of evil corporatist terrorism (lassez faire, 'free markets" ) over we the peons. Most of us have already done the tango with your ilk's standard talking points already
Yankhadenough On the contrary, you have no idea what libertarianism actually is and embarrass reason. Said corporatists have no power WITHOUT THE STATE. This is THE lesson of history - the state is always the TOOL USED by the elite class to exploit the masses. Without the government they are only as powerful as we want them to be via patronage. A "free market" is simply a description of the matrix of voluntary interactions and has no morality, positive or negative. Read books, please.
EsotericThrone I read the Constitution of the United States of America , and libertarianism which I have read about extensively on internet sites both pro & con, is the antithesis of the Constitution, which you have already made known. "Free market" philosophy is giving corporate personhood to business. WE THE PEOPLE , on the other hand, are for free people.
Momowagon: I can see you have had the good fortune of never having been poor. You complain of "socialism" but it's unlikely you have a clear concept of what the term means, other than what Rush Loudmouth has told you. I suggest you read your Bible again, and perhaps, especially if you spend some time with Matthew 25, you will know that Jesus believed it was a good thing to help those less fortunate than ourselves. e.g., provide health services to thos who cannot afford them.
You're embarrassing. That we should help care for others out of love and respect for humanity is a given, what libertarians oppose is using the STATE to administer such. First, it amorally introduces force to the equation, and second, it gives the inherently corrupt and in our case corporate government itself terrifying power. Your logic here is completely fallacious. You do not need the state to care for and love others, even financially. Grow up.
Esoteric Throne: Lighten up! You squawk because the majority rules in this country. I bet you didn't mind Bush and his cronies exercising their "mob rule" for years. Simmer down. It will be alright.
You're comments here are disgusting. Bush should've been impeached and tried as a war criminal. That you've assumed I'm some idiot conservative demonstrates how laughably shallow your perspectives are. For shame.
Yank The poor have safety nets. Medicaid, medicare, ER. It's not the governments place to tell me where my charity should go. "Thou shalt not steal" is right.
Some western industialized nations are socialist and oppressive. We in America know better than to give our freedom and property up to corrupt government beaureaucrats. Youl like the french or canadian systems, you are free to move there, although if you get cancer you are much less likely to survive. FYI
momowagon Who ssid its not the government's place? We VOTE what the government's place is. The Constitution is WE THE PEOPLE, for the Public Good and General Welfare, not just for special privileged ones. Anarchy is the opposite of Christianity and the Consitution. The Constitution protects HUMAN RIGHTS above and beyond your "property rights". Not everybody owns property, but everybody has human rights.
Yank You are missing the point. I know he physically healed them, but the point of the healing was to teach a spiritual lesson about the power of faith. The actual healing was secondary to the lesson.
And the INSURANCE = LIFE argument is BS. I have no insurance and I live very comfortably. I can go to any emergency room and get treatment for any life threatening ailment without insurance, and my life will be saved just as well as anyone else. Coverage is not a right, unless you or someone else is WILLING to pay for it. Forcing me to pay for your health care is totally opposite of what Jesus taught. Forced charity is simply stealing, and not charity at all.
momowagon On the contrary, Insurance = Death & Bankruptcy. That is why we need REFORM. Nobody is forcing you to give to charity. When Single Payer becomes law by majority VOTE, it will be taxed. Jesus said "Render unto Caesar..." So Jesus preaches both to heal the sick AND to pay your taxes.
momowagon: Don't you realize that the services you get at the ER drive up the costs for everyone else? "Forcing me to pay for your health care is totally opposite of what Jesus taught." Um, what chapter and verse is that? Get a clue.
He's talking about the FORCE part. IE Jesus would've opposed FORCE. He isn't saying (The mythical character) Jesus opposed HEALTHCARE, but the FORCE inherent in STATIST healthcare. As you said, "get a clue"... or maybe just some perspective. "Radical kid" is pretty embarrassingly status quo.
EsotericThrone BTW, the only "thrones" in America are in the bathroom. Jesus said: "This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you." This is a commandment from God, not a just a recommendation or mere suggestion.
When have I ever said anything about not loving people? Do you understand how insulting and narcissistic it is of you to presume you know anything about how, or how much I love and care for others? Here again, the fact that you think the only way to love/care for others is through the state is indicative of the profound psychological pathology rampant in our culture. You sound like the alienated man socialist philosophers have written about for decades - divorced from your own abilities to act.
Wow - what a laughable comment. Who's bearing false witness now? First of all, I'm not concerned with what Christians think Jesus endorsed, because magic isn't real and Jesus isn't "god". Second, philosophically it seems apparent that Christ's character was against violent coercion, and that's what governments are and do at their core. I suggest that Jesus's character would've been *actually* helping the sick and poor, not handing terrifying power to the elite class via the coercive state.
EsotericThrone Well, frankly it was clear from the beginning that you are a disciple of Ayn Rand. I learned long ago that the love of money replaced God in the hearts and minds of libertarians. Evil, pure unadulterated evil.
EsotericThrone Jesus did not hand power to the state, and He did not take it away either. Jesus said Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars, and unto God the things that are Gods . In other words, God in no way inhibits our Earthly duties to the state (rule by laws not of men). He also makes it clear that we owe God His due as well. You of course have unlimited free will to break all of man's and God's laws, but you also must face the consequences.
EsotericThrone I act within the Constitution by promoting healthcare bills to be passed into laws by the voting of our elected representatives, not with treasonous anarchy. You, sir, are a hypocrite that bears false witness , and Jesus does not take a shine to hypocrites.
At this point I can't even tell if you're being satirical. Are you serious with this stuff? If so, you've copped out by dodging the legitimate ethical concerns I've pointed out. Again, if you're serious, you embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone You are an Ayn Rand elitist student to the max, go to the head of the class! Seriously, we are seasoned commenters on the internets, do you honestly not think we know that so-called libertarians claim to associate themselves with "classic liberalism"? You are quoting from the Anarcho-Fascist Libertarian "bible" down to the letter, NOT the Judeo-Christian Bible.
His father's house being THE TEMPLE, a place of spiritual awakening. He didn't throw them out of jerusalem, and he didn't tell his followers not to do business with them. He just wanted them not to do their business within the sacred walls of the temple.
Do you know how corrupt the Roman Gov't was at the time of Jesus? It was an unrightful occupier of Israel and murderer of millions. Yet Jesus made a point to leave the political matters to the politicians, and the Jewish leadership killed him for it. They wanted political freedom, not spiritual awakening.
If you think Obama IS Jesus, I can see why you would support his health care plan.. Many of us think a corrupt government will run a corrupt health care monopoly.
momowagon Nobody here thinks Obama is Jesus, that would be blasphemy. And to think that Jesus is for corporate profits instead of the welfare of the sick is heresy. To keep healthcare insurance in the hands of corrupt moneychangers intead of by , of and for WE THE PEOPLE (the government) is hypocritical at best, sinfully evil at worst.
The United States government is a murderous, thieving melting pot of corporatism. It amazes me that the liberals I respect so much understand this when it comes to the absurd wars we start and assaults on civil liberties et al, but SOMEHOW believe these same corporatist would-be-dictators are going to do state-run medicine correctly and benevolently. If the corporatist state runs "healthcare", you're in for serious trouble. What's really immoral here is that you would force it on others via tax
This is absolutely awful. Your argument is garbage - and I'm an uninsured atheist. If people really cared, including liberals (who I'm with philosophically) they would set up communitarian healthcare services and systems VOLUNTARILY and PRIVATELY. That is, WITHOUT THE STATE. Without government force. What you're doing here is profoundly immoral. You do not understand what "healthcare" is, what "rights" are and what they entail, nor do you understand what the state is. You embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone Fear not, in America WE are the government . We are also the richest nation on Earth, and WE THE PEOPLE have an inherent obligation and duty to each other. The Declaration of Independence mentions that our Creator gave us certain inalienable rights, and the most important of these is LIFE.
No. It is an astounding feat of the state that you think YOU are the state, that you associate yourself with it. The state is a corporate gang of murderers and thieves. That you think WE are the state allows them to get away with what they do. "Healthcare" which you don't understand, is not a "right", which you don't understand. Rights imply duties. If health services are a "right" you're saying it's moral to force doctors to heal at the point of a gun, against their will, ditto for taxpayers
EsotericThrone Doctors are forced to heal now. Under federal law anyone who comes into the ER must be served, and if it is life threatening , they must keep them in their hospital , even if they are homeless and destitute. It is a shame that rights must be enforced , but ALL rights are enforced by the Constitution . If we had no Constitution , then we would be left hopelessly endangered by lawlessness and the whims of those who deem themselves privileged and above the peons.
Exactly one statement here is true: that doctors are forced to heal now. This says nothing of whether or not said force is ethically acceptable. (It isn't)
EsotericThrone Doctors took the Hippocratic Oath voluntarily, thus forcing themselves to "do no harm" from that day forward. Willful neglect is harm and unethical and highly immoral, and of course its unacceptable for a doctor to neglect the sick.
If you want communitarian healthcare (I think it's a decent idea) DO IT VOLUNTARILY. Do not use the state to FORCE others into doing it against their will. The irony of this whole bit is that YOU are the perpetrator - YOU are behaving immorally via your determination to use state coercion. Disgusting.
Is this a joke? I vote against it, two people vote for it, and then I'm FORCED into it. Honestly - are you serious? 51% of the people can vote away all the rights of the other 49% if they choose to. IE Mob rule - the larger group can FORCE the smaller group into being subject to its coercive dictate. ... again, Are you serious? Not forced?? Unbelievable.
If 51% of the population votes to make private schools illegal, and votes to make keeping your kids out of public schools illegal, parents are FORCED to send their children to public school, and children are FORCED to go to them. That a majority votes for a particular law or policy doesn't remove the FORCE from the imposition of said policy. Basic stuff, people.
"Voting" is mob rule. To say that the majority can vote away the minority's rights is to say that the majority can FORCE the minority. If you can't see this, you're irrationally biased, dishonest, or both. Being too stupid to understand isn't possible.
EsotericThrone VOTING is the fundamental basic foundation of the Constitution for WE THE PEOPLE to prevent elitist rule as in the days of ye ole feudal Medieval Times. You were born in the wrong century Sir Lord Backwardness, time to borrow a wayback machine so you could treat us like serfs .
WRONG. "Voting" is mob rule and ALLOWS, nay, NECESSITATES Elitist rule. It is amazing to me that you can't see how corporate our government is right now. Equally amazing is that you don't understand my basic points: I do not want to treat ANYONE like a serf, because NO ONE has the right to rule ANYONE. I don't want to give power to elites, I want to take it away from them - I don't want ANYONE to have power over other human beings. Honestly it's stunning that people can't see past their biases.
I'm not sure what you don't understand here. I am *against* human beings having power over others. My concern with the growth of government is in preventing elite control of institutions. I'm honestly at a loss for words - how could you possibly fail to understand this basic point?
So please actually READ my comments and THINK about them before responding again. I do not advocate power - I want to remove it from those who abuse it. The difference is I recognize that the state is the tool USED by the elite class to make you and I serfs. You are repulsively ignor-ant of this fact and are clinging to your ideology in the face of a perceived adversary. Our goals are the same, and yet you fight tooth and nail against human freedom. Disgusting.
EsotericThrone I am reading IN BETWEEN your not so cleverly hidden message of anarcho-fascist libertarianism. C'mon, you libertarians stick out on forums the same way you littered the highways w/ those goofy Ron Paul signs. And did you ever stop to wonder why your god Mr Paul was so against the govt yet he wanted to live in the highest tax paid govt housing in the land? If VOTING is "mob rule" to you, then you are clearly treasonous, against all human & civil & unalienable rights.
We forget judge not and that we were commanded to serve and love one another when we say get a job... We were commanded to have a stewardship of the earth. Yet we forsake that obligation. We were commanded to turn the other cheek yet we seek out war in distant lands. We profess the sanctity of family, yet we create an economic climate that makes it impossible for families to survive. So many admonitions have been lost to those seeking to uphold one or two of the teachings of Christ.
Jesus threw the moneychangers out of His Father's house, so it's easy to know what Jesus would do about these for-profit health insurance corporations.
Great video. What would Jesus do? I think he'd be angry at the way we as a society, as a country are handling things. Jesus would be in a rage over the insurance profiteers. Don't forget, momowagon, our "government" is US and if WE create an opportunity for everyone to contribute to the cash pot to enable everyone to have access to health care, then that is a good thing.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Jesus was primarily concerned with the spiritual health of his children, not so much the physical. He had the power to physically heal EVERYONE on the earth with no cost or consequence to anyone, but he didn't. Only a couple dozen or so healings are recorded in the gospels.
It is a Christian's responsibility to lift up and help those they are capable of lifting, but I doubt Jesus would be on board with a government entity forcing what should be virtuous charity on an entire population.
Jesus would tell us to stop being stupid. no smoking (cancer), no drinking in excess (liver disease), no eating in excess (high blood pressure, heart disease), no bathing in the sun (skin cancer). no prostitution (STD's), no man on man sex (fecal bacteria, AIDS), no eating without first washing hands ( infection, flu), no assisted suicide for the elderly, no abortions. no killing, raping, stabbing, hurting your neighbor. We could afford the needed healthcare if people understood his example.
bosco604 2 years ago
You forgot to mention NO WAR, NO Capital punishment, No Guantanamo, NO Police Brutality, No Exploitation of Third World Countries, No Siege of Gaza by the US, Israel and Egypt. I am sure Jesus would have comments about that too, since it is alleged he LOVES the Children of the world. I am sure you meant to mention these.
franklikespolitics 2 years ago
No i did not mention anything not related to the original post, which concerns healthcare in the U.S. You will never get very far in politics if you cant stay on topic. Maybe you should change your tag to franksADDpolitics. Dont worry, with healthcare passing, you can get that ADD checked out and get a few medications for it. Then when the side effects kick in, you can get some more medicines to counteract the side effects. Another sucker for the pharmaceutical companies.
bosco604 2 years ago
You do have a point Guantanamo, Gaza and Exploitation of third world countries. But war does affect the health of American soldiers coming back maimed or dead from war. You correctly point out some risky behaviors. You fail to point out it is promiscuous sex in both heterosexuals and unprotected sex that is the problem not the way one engages in sex. This video, I assume is advocating the Single Payer health Plan but does not make that clear. What is your position on that Plan?
franklikespolitics 2 years ago
You are correct in my missing promiscuous hetero's. I think they are stupid too. Unprotected sex is even more stupid. However, dont dismiss homo sex too easily. Fecal bacteria is transferred very easily to bedding and shower floors and causes many illnesses. Its just very unsanitary. If your body wanted you to use this area for sex instead of a simple waste chute, your body would have made provisions for it. Refer to my next post in answer to your question...
bosco604 2 years ago
I doubt there are few people that have not done oral sex, yet I can't think of a better way to get an e-coli infection, since one is licking just adjacent to the anus. One could argue that the tongue was made to speak, aid in eating and swallowing but try to convince the public not to engage in oral sex. I guess others could argue that the lips were made only for speaking and not for kissing. If a woman, had cancer and had to have her vagina removed would you preach to her, "NO ANAL SEX?"
franklikespolitics 2 years ago
When my government starts to suggest I somehow have to pay tax for roy's triple bypass for eating too much or anna's new lung for smoking, or for your infections because you like anal, I just cant buy into it. We need to take responsibility for our own health. I would gladly buy into any national plan that covers all of the non controllable health issues. So, live how you want. But dont ask me to pay for it when it doesnt work out for you.
bosco604 2 years ago
Boscoe you sound intellectually honest, so I will work with that assumption. Suppose you and I were in charge of developing a health care plan for the US. I agreed, we were not going to cover anyone that did not drink, 8-10 glasses of water, smoked, that ate too much, that did not excercise 3 times a week at least a half hour a day. did not eat adaquate amounts from the designated food groups and no anal sex or no un protected sex. But also outlawed profit on health care, would you back it?
franklikespolitics 2 years ago
That does it - I'm convinced that you're being satirical and playing a game with me. No one could possible write what you just wrote and be serious/honest. It's such a shame too - I'm sure that when you tell the truth about something like PNAC causing the Iraq war, people end up not believing you because you're hysterically irrational on other topics. Here again I suggest that Gabriel Kolko book, but I'm starting to wonder if you even read. You embarrass philosophy. You embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Libertarianism is very much like the PNAC, both claim to have elitist self-grandiose claims of privileges over and above the "mob rule" of Constitutional voting.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
No, libertarianism gives "corporate personhood" to NO ONE. Here again, you have an extremely shallow perspective on the matter based on a caricature of the philosophy. You know absolutely nothing about it. Further, your claim that the constitution is the antithesis of libertarianism is hilarious - the American revolution was very much a libertarian war spurned by libertarian philosophy and grievances. Perhaps my suggestion that you actually read books wasn't an empty insult?
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone You insult our Founding Fathers. You have already distanced yourself (off the deep end, i might add) from the Constitution, human and civil rights, voting, rule of law, and God's commandments to love thy neighbor . Instead of reading treasonous anarchist elitist books, I recommend that you take a basic Civics course.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Yank - an earnest suggestion - Gabriel Kolko is an amazing new left historian. Read his book "The Triumph of Conservatism". He details that the progressive era in the United States, popularly thought of as a boon for liberal / progressive politics, was actually a series of processes in which elites cartelized their industries via using government to enforce the cartel. If you read that book, again, written by a leftist historian, you'll better understand my position.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Your user ID says it all , you have made your position known before you type.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
What are you talking about? Because it has throne in it? Do you think that means I want to be someone's king? ... hahahahahahahaha. Comon man/gal, you have no idea what my handle means. It certainly has nothing to do with politics, or even other people. Wow. This is amazing.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Because you have chosen to have "esoteric" in your user ID is highly significant .
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
"EsotericThrone" is a reference to the immense personal struggle involved in self actualization. "Esoteric" is there because achieving this actualization is very difficult and involves a complex and confusing process of self-growth. The word "throne" is there as a metaphor - The throne of selfhood.. IE having a measure of self-discipline and refusing to allow circumstances to determine your actions. It is about personal growth, and it is insulting that you have attacked me on this,
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone wow, that was a very convoluted non-definition of both words. You may think you can insult our intelligence with such balderdash, but honestly, "the mob" out here does know that our human rights override your "privileges".
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Corporatists are NEVER libertarians because they REQUIRE THE STATE to exploit others. Again, you have absolutely no idea what libertarianism actually is, and, as you have demonstrated throughout this conversation, have extremely shallow perspectives on the matter based on a caricature of the philosophy.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
The cognitive dissonance of "libertarianism" never ceases to appall and bemuse me , by forcing people not to vote & by spiting human dignity and rights, and yet the rest of us peons are supposed to accept these elite anarchist dogmas "voluntarily".
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
What in the world are you talking about? Libertarianism is the utter and absolute absence of force. You can vote all you want, but you may not COERCE ME or others who do not wish to be a part of your extortion racket. (Government). Do you understand? I'm not forcing you to do anything EXCEPT acknowledge the right of others to not be forced by YOU as well. Basic shit.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Libertarianism is the elitists' dream world, a political/economic/social ideology of rule by men (usually with money) , not rule of law. Libertarians constantly lie about this primary edict of libertarianism. Libertarianism aligns itself with uncivilized & prehistorical Law of the Jungle mentality. Libertarianism is merely an elitist's desire to throw off the "shackles" of the Constitution of WE THE PEOPLE, and to go back in time before one man/one vote.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Further, how am I spiting human dignity and rights? I'm doing precisely the opposite. You however, by constantly growing the power of the corporatist state at the expense of the human individual, are clearly a tool in the hand of those who would indeed "spite human dignity and rights".
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone you have already stated you are AGAINST the right to vote (classic libertarianism). Gave you enuf rope and you already used it up. Too late to back paddle now.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
EsotericThrone On the contrary, Libertarianism is the HAVEN of evil corporatist terrorism (lassez faire, 'free markets" ) over we the peons. Most of us have already done the tango with your ilk's standard talking points already
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Yankhadenough On the contrary, you have no idea what libertarianism actually is and embarrass reason. Said corporatists have no power WITHOUT THE STATE. This is THE lesson of history - the state is always the TOOL USED by the elite class to exploit the masses. Without the government they are only as powerful as we want them to be via patronage. A "free market" is simply a description of the matrix of voluntary interactions and has no morality, positive or negative. Read books, please.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone I read the Constitution of the United States of America , and libertarianism which I have read about extensively on internet sites both pro & con, is the antithesis of the Constitution, which you have already made known. "Free market" philosophy is giving corporate personhood to business. WE THE PEOPLE , on the other hand, are for free people.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Momowagon: I can see you have had the good fortune of never having been poor. You complain of "socialism" but it's unlikely you have a clear concept of what the term means, other than what Rush Loudmouth has told you. I suggest you read your Bible again, and perhaps, especially if you spend some time with Matthew 25, you will know that Jesus believed it was a good thing to help those less fortunate than ourselves. e.g., provide health services to thos who cannot afford them.
radicalkidd55 2 years ago
You're embarrassing. That we should help care for others out of love and respect for humanity is a given, what libertarians oppose is using the STATE to administer such. First, it amorally introduces force to the equation, and second, it gives the inherently corrupt and in our case corporate government itself terrifying power. Your logic here is completely fallacious. You do not need the state to care for and love others, even financially. Grow up.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
Esoteric Throne: Lighten up! You squawk because the majority rules in this country. I bet you didn't mind Bush and his cronies exercising their "mob rule" for years. Simmer down. It will be alright.
radicalkidd55 2 years ago
You're comments here are disgusting. Bush should've been impeached and tried as a war criminal. That you've assumed I'm some idiot conservative demonstrates how laughably shallow your perspectives are. For shame.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
Yank The poor have safety nets. Medicaid, medicare, ER. It's not the governments place to tell me where my charity should go. "Thou shalt not steal" is right.
Some western industialized nations are socialist and oppressive. We in America know better than to give our freedom and property up to corrupt government beaureaucrats. Youl like the french or canadian systems, you are free to move there, although if you get cancer you are much less likely to survive. FYI
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon Who ssid its not the government's place? We VOTE what the government's place is. The Constitution is WE THE PEOPLE, for the Public Good and General Welfare, not just for special privileged ones. Anarchy is the opposite of Christianity and the Consitution. The Constitution protects HUMAN RIGHTS above and beyond your "property rights". Not everybody owns property, but everybody has human rights.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
momowagon Actually France is number one in overall healthcare, USA is only 37.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
momowagon Taxes are not charity, taxes are voted into law.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Yank You are missing the point. I know he physically healed them, but the point of the healing was to teach a spiritual lesson about the power of faith. The actual healing was secondary to the lesson.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon Nothing is secondary about Jesus' Commandment "Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself".
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
And the INSURANCE = LIFE argument is BS. I have no insurance and I live very comfortably. I can go to any emergency room and get treatment for any life threatening ailment without insurance, and my life will be saved just as well as anyone else. Coverage is not a right, unless you or someone else is WILLING to pay for it. Forcing me to pay for your health care is totally opposite of what Jesus taught. Forced charity is simply stealing, and not charity at all.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon On the contrary, Insurance = Death & Bankruptcy. That is why we need REFORM. Nobody is forcing you to give to charity. When Single Payer becomes law by majority VOTE, it will be taxed. Jesus said "Render unto Caesar..." So Jesus preaches both to heal the sick AND to pay your taxes.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
momowagon: Don't you realize that the services you get at the ER drive up the costs for everyone else? "Forcing me to pay for your health care is totally opposite of what Jesus taught." Um, what chapter and verse is that? Get a clue.
radicalkidd55 2 years ago
He's talking about the FORCE part. IE Jesus would've opposed FORCE. He isn't saying (The mythical character) Jesus opposed HEALTHCARE, but the FORCE inherent in STATIST healthcare. As you said, "get a clue"... or maybe just some perspective. "Radical kid" is pretty embarrassingly status quo.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone BTW, the only "thrones" in America are in the bathroom. Jesus said: "This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you." This is a commandment from God, not a just a recommendation or mere suggestion.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
When have I ever said anything about not loving people? Do you understand how insulting and narcissistic it is of you to presume you know anything about how, or how much I love and care for others? Here again, the fact that you think the only way to love/care for others is through the state is indicative of the profound psychological pathology rampant in our culture. You sound like the alienated man socialist philosophers have written about for decades - divorced from your own abilities to act.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone BTW , Jesus is NOT against government.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Wow - what a laughable comment. Who's bearing false witness now? First of all, I'm not concerned with what Christians think Jesus endorsed, because magic isn't real and Jesus isn't "god". Second, philosophically it seems apparent that Christ's character was against violent coercion, and that's what governments are and do at their core. I suggest that Jesus's character would've been *actually* helping the sick and poor, not handing terrifying power to the elite class via the coercive state.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Well, frankly it was clear from the beginning that you are a disciple of Ayn Rand. I learned long ago that the love of money replaced God in the hearts and minds of libertarians. Evil, pure unadulterated evil.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Jesus did not hand power to the state, and He did not take it away either. Jesus said Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesars, and unto God the things that are Gods . In other words, God in no way inhibits our Earthly duties to the state (rule by laws not of men). He also makes it clear that we owe God His due as well. You of course have unlimited free will to break all of man's and God's laws, but you also must face the consequences.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
EsotericThrone I act within the Constitution by promoting healthcare bills to be passed into laws by the voting of our elected representatives, not with treasonous anarchy. You, sir, are a hypocrite that bears false witness , and Jesus does not take a shine to hypocrites.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
At this point I can't even tell if you're being satirical. Are you serious with this stuff? If so, you've copped out by dodging the legitimate ethical concerns I've pointed out. Again, if you're serious, you embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone You are an Ayn Rand elitist student to the max, go to the head of the class! Seriously, we are seasoned commenters on the internets, do you honestly not think we know that so-called libertarians claim to associate themselves with "classic liberalism"? You are quoting from the Anarcho-Fascist Libertarian "bible" down to the letter, NOT the Judeo-Christian Bible.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Jesus's healings were done based on the faith of the person being healed. The purpose was to grow their faith in him, not the actual physical act.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon Jesus healed them physically, that is why they are called miracles.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Also,
The moneychangers were thrown out because they were in the Temple, not because they were moneychangers.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon Jesus threw the moneychangers out for their BEHAVIOR in His Father's house.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
His father's house being THE TEMPLE, a place of spiritual awakening. He didn't throw them out of jerusalem, and he didn't tell his followers not to do business with them. He just wanted them not to do their business within the sacred walls of the temple.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon God said "Thou shalt not steal" . Profitting from healthcare is a felony in other Western Industrialized societies.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Come on people,
Do you know how corrupt the Roman Gov't was at the time of Jesus? It was an unrightful occupier of Israel and murderer of millions. Yet Jesus made a point to leave the political matters to the politicians, and the Jewish leadership killed him for it. They wanted political freedom, not spiritual awakening.
If you think Obama IS Jesus, I can see why you would support his health care plan.. Many of us think a corrupt government will run a corrupt health care monopoly.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon Nobody here thinks Obama is Jesus, that would be blasphemy. And to think that Jesus is for corporate profits instead of the welfare of the sick is heresy. To keep healthcare insurance in the hands of corrupt moneychangers intead of by , of and for WE THE PEOPLE (the government) is hypocritical at best, sinfully evil at worst.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
The United States government is a murderous, thieving melting pot of corporatism. It amazes me that the liberals I respect so much understand this when it comes to the absurd wars we start and assaults on civil liberties et al, but SOMEHOW believe these same corporatist would-be-dictators are going to do state-run medicine correctly and benevolently. If the corporatist state runs "healthcare", you're in for serious trouble. What's really immoral here is that you would force it on others via tax
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
This is absolutely awful. Your argument is garbage - and I'm an uninsured atheist. If people really cared, including liberals (who I'm with philosophically) they would set up communitarian healthcare services and systems VOLUNTARILY and PRIVATELY. That is, WITHOUT THE STATE. Without government force. What you're doing here is profoundly immoral. You do not understand what "healthcare" is, what "rights" are and what they entail, nor do you understand what the state is. You embarrass liberalism.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Fear not, in America WE are the government . We are also the richest nation on Earth, and WE THE PEOPLE have an inherent obligation and duty to each other. The Declaration of Independence mentions that our Creator gave us certain inalienable rights, and the most important of these is LIFE.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
No. It is an astounding feat of the state that you think YOU are the state, that you associate yourself with it. The state is a corporate gang of murderers and thieves. That you think WE are the state allows them to get away with what they do. "Healthcare" which you don't understand, is not a "right", which you don't understand. Rights imply duties. If health services are a "right" you're saying it's moral to force doctors to heal at the point of a gun, against their will, ditto for taxpayers
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Doctors are forced to heal now. Under federal law anyone who comes into the ER must be served, and if it is life threatening , they must keep them in their hospital , even if they are homeless and destitute. It is a shame that rights must be enforced , but ALL rights are enforced by the Constitution . If we had no Constitution , then we would be left hopelessly endangered by lawlessness and the whims of those who deem themselves privileged and above the peons.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Exactly one statement here is true: that doctors are forced to heal now. This says nothing of whether or not said force is ethically acceptable. (It isn't)
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Doctors took the Hippocratic Oath voluntarily, thus forcing themselves to "do no harm" from that day forward. Willful neglect is harm and unethical and highly immoral, and of course its unacceptable for a doctor to neglect the sick.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
If you want communitarian healthcare (I think it's a decent idea) DO IT VOLUNTARILY. Do not use the state to FORCE others into doing it against their will. The irony of this whole bit is that YOU are the perpetrator - YOU are behaving immorally via your determination to use state coercion. Disgusting.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone Nobody is forcing anyone into anything. We VOTE for what we want in America.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Is this a joke? I vote against it, two people vote for it, and then I'm FORCED into it. Honestly - are you serious? 51% of the people can vote away all the rights of the other 49% if they choose to. IE Mob rule - the larger group can FORCE the smaller group into being subject to its coercive dictate. ... again, Are you serious? Not forced?? Unbelievable.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
How could you possibly not see the force in majority (mob) rule?
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
If 51% of the population votes to make private schools illegal, and votes to make keeping your kids out of public schools illegal, parents are FORCED to send their children to public school, and children are FORCED to go to them. That a majority votes for a particular law or policy doesn't remove the FORCE from the imposition of said policy. Basic stuff, people.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
"Voting" is mob rule. To say that the majority can vote away the minority's rights is to say that the majority can FORCE the minority. If you can't see this, you're irrationally biased, dishonest, or both. Being too stupid to understand isn't possible.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone VOTING is the fundamental basic foundation of the Constitution for WE THE PEOPLE to prevent elitist rule as in the days of ye ole feudal Medieval Times. You were born in the wrong century Sir Lord Backwardness, time to borrow a wayback machine so you could treat us like serfs .
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
WRONG. "Voting" is mob rule and ALLOWS, nay, NECESSITATES Elitist rule. It is amazing to me that you can't see how corporate our government is right now. Equally amazing is that you don't understand my basic points: I do not want to treat ANYONE like a serf, because NO ONE has the right to rule ANYONE. I don't want to give power to elites, I want to take it away from them - I don't want ANYONE to have power over other human beings. Honestly it's stunning that people can't see past their biases.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone "nay" , did you say "nay"? One of those freudian feudal slips, eh?
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you don't understand here. I am *against* human beings having power over others. My concern with the growth of government is in preventing elite control of institutions. I'm honestly at a loss for words - how could you possibly fail to understand this basic point?
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
So please actually READ my comments and THINK about them before responding again. I do not advocate power - I want to remove it from those who abuse it. The difference is I recognize that the state is the tool USED by the elite class to make you and I serfs. You are repulsively ignor-ant of this fact and are clinging to your ideology in the face of a perceived adversary. Our goals are the same, and yet you fight tooth and nail against human freedom. Disgusting.
EsotericThrone 2 years ago
EsotericThrone I am reading IN BETWEEN your not so cleverly hidden message of anarcho-fascist libertarianism. C'mon, you libertarians stick out on forums the same way you littered the highways w/ those goofy Ron Paul signs. And did you ever stop to wonder why your god Mr Paul was so against the govt yet he wanted to live in the highest tax paid govt housing in the land? If VOTING is "mob rule" to you, then you are clearly treasonous, against all human & civil & unalienable rights.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
We forget judge not and that we were commanded to serve and love one another when we say get a job... We were commanded to have a stewardship of the earth. Yet we forsake that obligation. We were commanded to turn the other cheek yet we seek out war in distant lands. We profess the sanctity of family, yet we create an economic climate that makes it impossible for families to survive. So many admonitions have been lost to those seeking to uphold one or two of the teachings of Christ.
tinytreasures1 2 years ago
tinytreasures1 Thank you for clarifying that these were indeed God's commandments and not His "suggestion box" .
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
jesus would bitch slap every one in goverment. destroy the 2 party system!!! 2 sides of the same coin the coin of corruption
2hunt 2 years ago
Jesus threw the moneychangers out of His Father's house, so it's easy to know what Jesus would do about these for-profit health insurance corporations.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Yankhad enough. are you a democrat? I'm asking cause Obama just filled the white house with money changers.
MustacheVerra 2 years ago
MustacheVerra
Let's fill it with Single Payers then :-)
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Americans sure deserve it.
Good luck!
MustacheVerra 2 years ago 5
MustacheVerra
Very kind of you to say !
I pray for that.
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
Great video. What would Jesus do? I think he'd be angry at the way we as a society, as a country are handling things. Jesus would be in a rage over the insurance profiteers. Don't forget, momowagon, our "government" is US and if WE create an opportunity for everyone to contribute to the cash pot to enable everyone to have access to health care, then that is a good thing.
Bandorino 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Jesus was primarily concerned with the spiritual health of his children, not so much the physical. He had the power to physically heal EVERYONE on the earth with no cost or consequence to anyone, but he didn't. Only a couple dozen or so healings are recorded in the gospels.
It is a Christian's responsibility to lift up and help those they are capable of lifting, but I doubt Jesus would be on board with a government entity forcing what should be virtuous charity on an entire population.
momowagon 2 years ago
momowagon
Thou dosteth protesteth too mucheth
Yankhadenough 2 years ago
.
Dear momowagon,
And how may souls did Christ lift up by saying to the sick, "get over it."? or, "go see a doctor."? or, "after your co-pay..."
For a Christian Nation to mock their Christ is, well...
... Extremely un-Christ like, NO?
Who then, DID Christ turn away?
.
maxx1000 2 years ago 2
Good job. It's a good question, one that I've asked often.
Lightweaver13 2 years ago 7