Egyptian wilderness
Church leaders learn to guide largest Christian population in Middle East
FULL STORY
RT @LIAint: Just read @world_mag's "In the Shadow of War" about the people of the Nuba Mountains. Anyone else read it yet?
Under an open heaven: Living in the Spirit brings into existence the things that are not
RT @drewcollins: I'm reading an article in @WORLD_mag about the efforts of @palmettofamily and @erlcsbc to oppose cockfighting. Who knew?
RT @TWERadio: New TW&E: A 'Literature & the Arts' program — Max McLean, Andrée Seu Peterson, Susan Olasky, ‘As One Devil to Anot ...
With a bill weighing in at $940 billion and more than 2,500 pages, most Americans are asking the big question: How is it going to affect me?
WORLD Washington Bureau reporter Emily Belz lays out a timeline of the healthcare bill’s impact on the average American.
Copyright © 2012 God's World Publications. All rights reserved.
Articles may not be reproduced without permission.
Click to Print
Include Comments
back to top107 Comments to “Healthcare bill’s impact”
Nothing here for me except higher taxes.
Report comment to moderator
So, you tan a lot, Bob?
Report comment to moderator
So, you buy a lot stolen watches Scott?
Report comment to moderator
The health care plan mainly consists of paying for abortion, I honestly do not support this bill, this only means more abortion and higher taxes! This is not right!
Report comment to moderator
MIM, I don’t wear a watch, so no. Your point?
Report comment to moderator
Goodbye to the America I knew and loved.
Report comment to moderator
Yuck. Yuck. Yuck.
•In three months, those with preexisting conditions can enroll in a temporary national insurance plan.
Anyone want to comment on the chances this is extended, and extended, and extended… “temporary” sure.
Report comment to moderator
RRBAR, agreed. We no longer need to live in fear of the insurance company saying we’re denied a policy because we have high blood pressure. The days of insurance company rescission are going to be gone. Children will have health insurance. There will be no lifetime or annual insurance caps on catastrophic illnesses, sending people off to die. Yes, it’s the dawn of a new day here in the greatest country in the world. A good new day!
Report comment to moderator
This is wonderful news indeed! Nobody will die! All will receive health care! The fountain of youth has been discovered! Does this mean all can have free lattes too?
Report comment to moderator
“There will be no lifetime or annual insurance caps on catastrophic illnesses, sending people off to die.”
No the insurance companies won’t do it, the goverment will when they see how much Medicaid is costing. 500 billion cuts will insure that!!
And it is a good thing that insurance can’t cancell someone, why didn’t we just make a law saying that and not take over the best system in the world and make it like Canada and England where they have restricted care.
Congress already passed a bill the set up insurance pools for the hard to insure. The States just had to sign up for it!
Report comment to moderator
The amount of government spending Emily reports will amount to 3.3% of total health care spending over the same 10-yr. period.
Report comment to moderator
Correction Medicare not Medicaid.
The Bills calls for my Tricare for Life (my free retirement military healthcare) to go from $480 year to $3200 a year.
No much for no tax hikes for the middle class. Just another change we can believe in!!
Report comment to moderator
The health care plan mainly consists of paying for abortion,
I am glad that hyperbole is never found at worldmagblog.
Anyway, I’ve been planning to have an abortion for years. Now I will be able to afford it! Halleluyah! Praise Be!
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
I could be wrong, I’m still looking into it, but from what I can tell members of cost-sharing groups like Medi-Share and Samaritan Ministries are exempt from the requirement to have health insurance. Hopefully this is true as it’s the only way we’ve conceivably been able to afford some kind of emergency coverage. Has anyone else looked into this? Or is anyone currently a member of such a group and have you heard from your company? (BTW, I’m not talking about whether or not this type of group is a good way to go about emergency coverage in your opinion, I’ve already done that research.)
Report comment to moderator
I wondered how those groups would fare, Juliana. I hope provisions have been made to allow people to continue using these types of groups rather than forcing them into insurance policies.
Report comment to moderator
See the Wall Street Journal today. An editorial on Stupak and how what he’s done ensures government paying for abortion.
All it will take is one test case funded by Planned Parenthood.
Report comment to moderator
Debra, I saw the following posted at the Samaritan Ministries website, dated Monday.
PEORIA, IL–Members of Samaritan Ministries International will be able to continue sharing medical needs as they have done for the past 15 years, thanks to an exemption to the individual mandate in the health care bill approved by the U.S. House on Sunday, James Lansberry said Monday.
Lansberry, vice president of Samaritan Ministries International, said the exemption for members of health care sharing ministries is intact in the bill now on the president’s desk.
“Members do not need to change anything they’re doing,” said Lansberry, who is also president of the Alliance of Health Care Sharing Ministries.
He said that the reconciliation bill passed by the House and now before the Senate “also has nothing in it that we can find that affects anything related to individual mandate exemptions.”
The rest is here: http://www.samaritanministries.org/breakingnews/?p=224
From what I read elsewhere on their site, it is their expectation that because of this exemption involvement with their ministry would increase as they do provide Christians a pro-life avenue for health cost coverage.
Report comment to moderator
Scott wrote; “Children will have health insurance.”
We’re all children now, with a beloved father in Washington. We have the nanny state most of us voted for and wanted. And since money grows on trees in Washington, we can be babies all our lives. All this means there will be a lot more crying and whining in our national future. And there will be less need for parents than ever.
______________
#1 – Bob, you are in this government’s sights for punishment and oppression. The reason: you play by the rules.
Report comment to moderator
Juliana, on the other hand, at one point the Senate bill included payments to Christian Scientists who offer prayer as a substitute for medical treatments.
Report comment to moderator
According to the letter of the law, everyone will receive health care.
Of course, the bill doesn’t specify exactly how much. And so insurance companies will just continue to offer less and less coverage until it becomes meaningless.
Once the bill takes full effect, you’ll be entitled to see a doctor someday and he may offer to write you a prescription if you’re lucky.
It’s like Obama said in one speech, “Maybe grandma should just take a pill!”
Report comment to moderator
#18 Juliana–That’s very good news. I’m also glad to hear that they expect to be able to add new people to the group. It did occur to me that an exemption might be made that would allow people to continue as before, but might not allow new members. I am glad to hear that they will be able to grow. You never know, this may be real opportunity for these ministries as more people are going to be forced into the market, and may be seeking alternatives to insurance companies.
Report comment to moderator
xion post 21,
when you say:
” And so insurance companies will just continue to offer less and less coverage until it becomes meaningless.”
this is of course nonsense. The law mandates minimum coverages and this will set a floor on benefits. IN general, it appears that this benefit is somewhat better than present plans. As a minimum preventive care will be free.
Report comment to moderator
Wow. These are some sour grapes. Yes, JM, many children have been created, you go that one right.
Report comment to moderator
Hmm, yet again insightful deep thought on the health care reform bill.
I particularly like the comment that most of the plan will be for abortions.
Compared to treatments for cardiac problems? How about the expensive medications for a variety of chronic diseases?
But perhaps it is too much to expect a reasoned discussion from conservatives on this topic.
Report comment to moderator
“As a minimum preventive care will be free.”
I am so glad the Doctor’s have agree not to charge for preventive care. Do they know this?
Report comment to moderator
Lloyd –
Do you think doctors will hang around their offices to give free preventive care? Will doctors be working for nothing, is that the idea?
Report comment to moderator
LLoyd post 26,
ah I see, someone else who wants to play solipsistic arguments rather than make substantive comments.
Indeed under the health care reform bill insurance will cover preventive care and it will be free to the insured.
Nowhere did I say or the bill say that the doctors would not be paid, merely that there would be no charge to the patient.
But keep at it. You are clearly demonstrating the complete paucity of reasoned argument against health care reform.
Report comment to moderator
Are you people serious? This should be embarrassing you folks. It’s not that the DOCTORS will work for free, it’s the it won’t cost patients. JM was right, again, people have turned into children.
It’s in defeat that the true colors are being paraded about. It most certainly ain’t pretty.
Report comment to moderator
Offering free preventative care is one thing. Getting people to take advantage of it is another.
Report comment to moderator
scott post 29,
unfortunately I suggest that indeed the posters are serious.
There are substantive discussions which can be held regarding the bill.
Raising red herring arguments about doctors working for free certainly is not one of them
Report comment to moderator
Politicians will decide what people get from health care. Washington doesn’t have enough to do already.
Will all people be treated the same? Or are some people more equal than others?
SOCIALISM DOESN’T WORK!!
Well, I did hear of one place where socialistic medicine does work, Singapore. Is that because a hospital is just around the corner no matter where you are in Singapore?
Report comment to moderator
Louise post 30,
then there will be lower costs to the insurance companies and, given the controls on administrative costs, in the short term, premiums will go down.
So instead of compelling the individual to have the opportunity for preventive care you would seem to want the government to compel the individual to take advantage of preventive care.
Very puzzling.
Report comment to moderator
Bob Buckles post 32,
health insurance companies already deciding what treatments individuals can get. Now at least this decision will be subject to control by democratic processes.
Report comment to moderator
NO it will not be free to anyone; someone has to pay for it, higher premiums, higher taxes, or less patient care, short time with the doctor. The doctors are not going to take a hit, the insurance companies will just raise rates or fight to cut services. This is what has happened in England and Canada.
Einstien said it’s stupid to try the same thing over and over and expect different results.
Report comment to moderator
You’ll finally get it Scott, if this ignorant bill actually comes to fruition, until then, live on whatever you’re dreaming about.
Report comment to moderator
Scott you are right, if you are on the Governments program, it free to you. Just EVERYONE else has to pay more!
Report comment to moderator
Musing 33, since this isn’t a government take-over of health care, it can’t compel anyone to do anything in that regard – can it?
Report comment to moderator
LLoyd post 35,
as I noted, it will be free to the patient.
I believe you will find that even the WMB materials notes this:
http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16543
But keep it up LLoyd.
Report comment to moderator
Louise post 38,
where in the bill does it say that the government is taking over the delivery of health care?
Where does the bill say you will not be taxed?
You are of course knowingly making a ridiculous statement, but keep it up.
Report comment to moderator
lloyd post 37,
well since there is no public option in this bill, it is not clear what government program you are discussing which will be free.
Report comment to moderator
victoria post 36,
I do believe that Obama signed the Senate bill this afternoon.
Health care reform is now the law of the land.
How do you argue it will not come to fruition?
Report comment to moderator
Read it again Musing. I did not say the gov’t is taking over delivery of health care, nor mention taxes. Fatigue must be setting in, but keep it up.
Report comment to moderator
#39
And with the trillions of dollars in debt, health care cost rising every year, entitlements increasing, baby boomer retiring, how do we pay for it. And if you really believe the CBO estiments, I have some ocean front property here in Colorado I would like to sell you.
Report comment to moderator
Forcing people to buy something against their will is not Constitutional. That is why this bad bill may “not come to fruition.”
Report comment to moderator
Louise post 43,
I believe you said:
“Musing 33, since this isn’t a government take-over of health care, it can’t compel anyone to do anything in that regard – can it?”
in the form of a question.
Given your stance on the quesiton as posed, it is a reasonable inference that this is arguing that this is a take over of health care by the government. since the government is not providing the care and this will increase the funding of health care by the government to just under half, I am finding it hard to find the take over.
bB
As to compelling the individual to buy the insurance, may I simply repose this as you get a tax refund if you buy health care insurance, and the government can most certainly provide tax deductions.
Report comment to moderator
lloyd post 44,
perhaps you did not read the CBO report: this reduces the deficit.
Report comment to moderator
So much pouting and poor conduct. I guess I should have expected it, especially with all the name calling that’s being done. Be that as it may, in the venerable words of Victoria from a recent post about the pledge of allegiance…
TOO BAD, you’ll just have to endure!
I’m thrilled -
And by the way, Victoria, in case you missed the hubbub, the bill has already come to fruition.
Report comment to moderator
Louise post 45,
when you say:
“Forcing people to buy something against their will is not Constitutional. That is why this bad bill may “not come to fruition.”
But giving one a tax deduction if one does buy insurance is most certainly constitutional.
Good try though!
Report comment to moderator
The government controls WHAT is in coverage!
They control WHO they cover!
They control HOW MUCH they can charge!
The government taxes us to pay for it.
They control health care, call it what you want.
Report comment to moderator
Musing, you seem to have a problem with the plain, simple meaning of words. Done.
Report comment to moderator
If only John McCain were President right now! Then everything would be great! LOL.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_03/022992.php
What a joke. A vile joke. I’m going to send him a letter tonight.
Report comment to moderator
Lloyd post 50,
no:
1) the government sets minimum standards. One can buy more
2) well l yes the government is not going to let health insurance companies selectively choose who to insure. And you seriously argue that insurance companies should be able to drop yo if you get sick?
3) No they don’t control how much they can charge. They do control how much can be used for overhead costs.
4) HOw much money do you make? Effectively if under $250K with a family, no they wont.
5) Hmm where in the bill does this come from?
It does sound to me like you perhaps need to sit down and take deep breaths. This is truly overheated rhetoric.
Report comment to moderator
Louise post 51,
perhaps alternatively you are among those trying to use quibbling with language to masquerade as substantive argument.
Report comment to moderator
#47
Yes, the CBO said that, but only because congress told them they would cut 500 billion in MEDICARE, then spend it on new entiltment in MEDICARE and use the same money to finance the 32 million new patients on OBOMACARE. Tax 10 years to pay for 6, what happens then? Cut care for 4 years while they tax for the next 6? So People get care for 6 years out of every 10!
Good plan!
Report comment to moderator
Scott post 52,
it sounds like since McCain was unable to become president and unable to stop health care that he will just retire in place.
Report comment to moderator
Lloyd post 55,
no actually cut $500B in medicare costs not coverage.
A big chunk of that was the 15% extra they paid to medicare advantage providers.
You don’t want the government to seriously try to obtain savings in medicare costs?
If we don’t then we will go bankrupt.
Report comment to moderator
Lloyd post 55,
now you are arguing that there are no start up costs for the program?
This sounds like sour grapes over the CBO process.
Let me see, what happened to game the CBO numbers for the GOP tax cur under Bush II?
Report comment to moderator
Honestly, I’m not sure I can tell him from some of the posters here tonight. They’ve lost all ability to debate on the points and have this “take my toys and go home” attitude. McCain is going to get an email from me TONIGHT. How dare he?!?!?!
Report comment to moderator
The bill may never come to fruition Scott, there are states which are now going to sue – this bill can be repealed, it’s also un-Constitutional –
Don’t make a lot of doctors appointments just yet.
Report comment to moderator
Scott,
Take it easy, I know you feel elated over the health bill, but it isn’t over yet. LOL
Report comment to moderator
I don’t mind cost cuts and finding waste and abuse.
Why did they wait for this bill to pass to do that?
I just don’t believe the government is willing to do it!!
Example: They sent me a letter telling me they were going to send me the census. They sent me the census, then they sent me a post card telling they sent me the census!
These are the people you believe will cut cost in health care?
Report comment to moderator
The bill is LAW. See, when both houses approve it and the President signs it, it is a law. It HAS come to fruition by any normal thinking persons definition. You can certainly repeal it, or try, but without a doubt, the bill is a law.
A lawsuit does NOT make it unconstitutional, Victoria. But, if this makes you feel better, then fine. You can block the sun with your finger and claim there is no sun all you want. Meanwhile, back on earth…..
Report comment to moderator
Most people in America agree that we need reform,
(a)Can’t cancel because you sick or reach a limit
(b) System so sick people can get coverage
(3) Tort reform!!
But this takeover is not what most of Americans wanted.
Scott
Is it constitutional to FORCE
Report comment to moderator
Sorry
Most people in America agree that we need reform,
(a)Can’t cancel because you sick or reach a limit
(b) System so sick people can get coverage
(3) Tort reform!!
But this takeover is not what most of Americans wanted.
Scott
Is it constitutional to FORCE people to buy a service?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria knows that, LOL –
RIght you are, one can try – and unless this country tries we will never know – just to give you a ‘heads up’ the majority of American’s are very angry over this bill.
Take it easy Scott, it isn’t over.
Report comment to moderator
You asked all Americans Victoria? You must be tired right now.
On the repeal, good luck with the veto-proof majority. You’re going to have to get busy!
Report comment to moderator
There is more than likely a whole new crew coming in after the elections this fall –
The majority can change over-night, we will see.
Report comment to moderator
Eight months from now we’ll see a lot of new faces in Congress.
Report comment to moderator
We’re not talking about a simple majority, we’re talking about enough to over-ride a VETO from, umm, the current sitting President. It could happen. But, there could> be a god named allah. The possibility is not nil. You’ll really have to wait until 2012 on this one. The big question is, are you willing to put moderate, pro-choice republicans in office to even try?
Maybe, Louise maybe. This is what happened to Republics in 2006 so it can most certainly happen again. We tossed those bums out and then more-so in 2008.
Report comment to moderator
When I heard on the radio that the health care bill had passed, I wondered How long until Musing checks into worldmagblog with a comment?
Listen. It’s all his fault! Get the stones. Get a stake. Start a fire going.
Oh, I forgot. This is a web site that promotes love and peace. Never mind. As you were.
Report comment to moderator
Scott,
You are just rude, crude and a misconstrued dude. You lost the debate along time ago, Scott. And your rhetoric has just become more and more lame. Give it up. Your words just sound like so much calliope music. (My apologies to the calliopes.)
Report comment to moderator
#72
I am reading this comment with amazed appreciation. It certainly displays the kind of respect and intelligent comment we all appreciate at worldmagblog.
“Rude, crude, and misconstrued dude.”
A real gift at turning an insulting phrase, which perhaps will do instead of intelligent thought?
Report comment to moderator
#23 Musing “The law mandates minimum coverages and this will set a floor on benefits.”
Where does it say that?
If that is true, then there is no such thing as private insurance companies anymore other than as a facade. If the government says what is covered and how much it will cost and who will get it, then these insurance companies ARE the public option. What we have in that case is agencies responsible for collection and redistribution of wealth and benefits for the IRS.
Report comment to moderator
Louise at #45: Forcing people to buy something against their will is not Constitutional. That is why this bad bill may “not come to fruition.”
It happens all the time.
Many states force drivers to buy auto insurance.
Buildings have to meet building codes, which requires building owners to purchase products and services in order to meet the standards.
That’s just a couple of examples. If it were unconstitutional, it would have been challenged and overturned long ago.
Report comment to moderator
Lloyd: Most people in America agree that we need reform,
(a)Can’t cancel because you sick or reach a limit
(b) System so sick people can get coverage
(3) Tort reform!!
But this takeover is not what most of Americans wanted.
For what seems like the millionth time. THERE IS NO TAKEOVER!!
The bulk of what was passed is points a and b on your list. There is some necessary government regulation to ensure it happens, which is unavoidable. It is not a takeover.
Tort reform is a separate issue which can and should be implemented, but that alone is not going to solve the problem of access to health care.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria: RIght you are, one can try – and unless this country tries we will never know – just to give you a ‘heads up’ the majority of American’s are very angry over this bill.
If that’s true, then we can expect a lot of Democratic members of Congress to get voted out in November. Certainly the Republicans plan to try to make that happen.
I think you’re wrong. I think that once Americans realize they’re gaining a lot from this bill, they’re going to be mad at the charlatans trying to hoodwink them, as you have been hoodwinked. But we’ll see.
I can just see the campaign ads now. “My opponent voted for the terrible legislation that ensures you can get health insurance even with a pre-existing condition, and ensures you can’t lose it even if you get seriously ill. Vote for me and I’ll fight to restore the insurance companies’ power to screw you over.”
There’s a winner.
Report comment to moderator
Xion: If that is true, then there is no such thing as private insurance companies anymore other than as a facade. If the government says what is covered and how much it will cost and who will get it, then these insurance companies ARE the public option. What we have in that case is agencies responsible for collection and redistribution of wealth and benefits for the IRS.
So you want insurance companies to be able to charge you premiums and yet refuse to cover various things at their whim? You want them to be able to cancel your policy just when you need it most?
Interesting. Weird, but interesting.
I had a discussion with my neighbor recently about our homeowners’ insurance policies. We both suffered some ice damage in the mid-Atlantic snows last month. But the problem is, your homeowners insurer will cancel your policy after just a couple of claims, and then you’ll be stuck having to get a very high-priced policy or have your mortgage company become very unhappy with you.
It’s not myth, by the way. A close friend of mine had two claims in two years for significant water damage due to basement flooded, and her insurer canceled the policy. She ended up getting a policy that covered less and cost twice as much, which was all she could do after actually trying to use the insurance for its stated purpose.
My neighbor and I agreed this is a sorry state of affairs that they should not be allowed to get away with. Currently, health insurers have the legal power to do the exact same thing, to cancel your policy when you get diagnosed with cancer or heart disease. This legislation will prevent them from doing that, so that, unlike your homeowner’s policy, you can file a significant claim and not fear being left with no coverage.
And you actually think that is a bad thing.
The conservative mind never ceases to amaze me. I do not understand.
Report comment to moderator
sigh. Only the first paragraph above, the quote from Xion, should be in italics.
Report comment to moderator
STEVEG, don’t be so silly. People don’t have to own cars or buildings. State and local laws are no match for the power of national laws which leave citizens no choice but punishment or emigration.
Report comment to moderator
“So you want insurance companies to be able to charge you premiums and yet refuse to cover various things at their whim? You want them to be able to cancel your policy just when you need it most?”
How about a one page law then.
The problem is that it takes 2500 pages and 2499 of them are worthless.
“If that’s true, then we can expect a lot of Democratic members of Congress to get voted out in November.”
And hopefully most of the republicans..they arent any better.
“THERE IS NO TAKEOVER!!”
I’m sure that’s what Bismark said too.
Report comment to moderator
Obama has fooled some of the people, ……. we will see what happens this fall -
Report comment to moderator
I have to agree with #73. While the phrase certainly rhymed well, it doesn’t add much to the discussion.
Report comment to moderator
Neither did 73, HOPESPRINGS, among others. Sheesh!
Report comment to moderator
Many don’t, Louise.
Report comment to moderator
#78 SteveG No one here is defending insurance companies. They are the bottom of the barrel right below lawyers. But politicians are the lowest of them all.
If the market messes up you can vote with your wallet. You can vote every day if you want. If the government messes up, you can vote once every few years and change will occur on the order of decades. By that time we’ll all be dead.
BTW you never answered the question. Does the bill mandate minimum coverage or are insurance companies even more motivated to offer you fewer and fewer services for higher and higher costs. If they can’t then haven’t they just become a government distribution service?
Report comment to moderator
Almost a quarter of Republicans think Obama ‘may be the Antichrist’ as 14 states sue over healthcare reforms
By David Gardner
24th March 2010
Americans who suggest Barack Obama should rot in hell are apparently deadly serious.
Nearly a quarter of Republicans believe the Democrat president ‘may be the Antichrist’, according to a survey.
An even greater number compared him to Hitler.
Mr Obama was jubilant this week after securing his £626billion healthcare reform plan.
But his triumph seems only to have inflamed his critics among the evangelical Christians from America’s heartland who kept George Bush in power for eight years and have demonised his successor.
More than half of the Republicans quizzed by Harris Poll, 57 per cent, believed the president was secretly Muslim, something he has consistently denied.
And 67 per cent of Republicans who responded believed Obama was a socialist, despite his central leanings.
The startling results came as lawyers representing 14 U.S. states filed lawsuits yesterday challenging an overhaul of the country’s $2.5trillion healthcare system, minutes after President Barack Obama signed the landmark legislation.
One joint lawsuit by a dozen Republican attorneys general and a Democrat claims the sweeping reforms violate state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments.
Virginia went to court separately, while Missouri Republican Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder said he would like to join the suit.
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
lloyd post 65,
actually no it is law because our governmental process passed it.
Are you or are you not in favor of the constitution????
Report comment to moderator
victoria post 88,
yes an interesting amalgam of falsehoods apparently believed by significant percentage of Republicans.
Thanks for posting this. The conservative respect for fact would appear to be clearly demonstrated (a point I have made in WMB many times).
Report comment to moderator
xion post 87,
actually I cant really vote with my wallet: I am constrained by the choices provided by my employer. As such, my only defense is government regulation to control the most egregious behavior of the insurance companies.
Nice try, but no cigar.
Report comment to moderator
thorn post 81,
so why are Republicans working so hard to add more pages to this bill on the floor of the Senate?
I am watching them on C-Span right now. Very amusing.
Report comment to moderator
Musing an interesting fact regarding one of the questions. I have spoken to Muslim’s here, born in Muslim country, …. those who have turned from Muslim to Christian say strongly that he is a Muslim -
Report comment to moderator
xion post 74,
when you say:
“If that is true, then there is no such thing as private insurance companies anymore other than as a facade”
this is just plain silly.
Government for example makes requirements on automotive safety all the time. At least Ford remains a private company.
You have repeatedly misstated the facts of the health care reform issue and the posting of posters in this blog, and I suggest that this really does not improve your credibility.
Report comment to moderator
victoria post 94,
tell me about Rev. Wright.
Victoria, he is I suggest at least as Christian as you are.
If you disagree we then devolve in to the definition of a Christian, and you know how this discussion will end.
So please don’t be silly.
Report comment to moderator
montyfisherwoof post 72,
I suggest for the record that the recent actions of congress show that scott has actually won the debate on the only field which matters.
It is conservaives which have lost the debate.
Report comment to moderator
lloyd post 65,
I believe the most recent polls show that the American public support this health care reform bill by 49% to 40%.
I believe your points would seem to be in error.
Report comment to moderator
Musing – 96
I didn’t mention Wright’s name, you’ll have to find some other material for your posts, LOL – that really was lame!
Report comment to moderator
Look health care reform is law.
It is supported by the American public 49% to 40%.
Ir can not realistically be repealed under any foreseeable scenario.
Even the Republicans admit that some of its measure should not be repealed.
So how are they going to run against this in November: we are adamantly against the health care reform bill, except of course passages 3, 7, 1`3, 267, …
Yup that is a clear sound bite to run on.
Or perhaps they will run on “repeal the protection against retroactive rescission”. Yup, that sounds good to.
Sure.
Frum has it right: the Republicans, in refusing to negotiate, grossly miscalculated.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria: Do any of you here on WMB care to comment as to what you believe regarding the article in post #88 which was spurned on by Obama’s health bill?
I’m surprised that only 1/4 of Republicans think Obama may be the anti-Christ, since about 3/4 of Republicans seem to have gone completely insane since Obama took office.
Report comment to moderator
“so why are Republicans working so hard to add more pages to this bill on the floor of the Senate?”
Do you have trouble reading my whole post, i basically said get rid of them too. They work no less hard than dems to line their own pockets.
Report comment to moderator
victoria post 99,
you have not nor can you provide any supportable argument that Obama is not a Christian.
And to insinuate otherwise is at best disingenuous.
If you truly believe he is a muslim, please provide your sustaining evidence.
Report comment to moderator
A true Christian would not want their grandchild to be killed in the womb.
Report comment to moderator
victoria post 104.
ah but you charged he was a muslim. You have as, I noted, provided no data to support that.
You are now making a second unsubstantiated claim that supporting limited abortion means one is not a Christian.
As we have done many times, victoria:
1) show that Jesus preached against abortion
2) show that the Bible forbids abortion
I will let you do this one more time, but you have failed to provide this substantiation in the past. Have you done more research since then and so you can provide new data?
Report comment to moderator
And to beat a dead horse victoria,
you claimed that Obama was a muslim.
If you have data to support this, provide.
If you do not, then withdraw your comment.
But don’t weasel word to try to cover the fact that yo don’t have the supporting data.
Report comment to moderator
victoria has reopened, despite the historical paucity of progress on the point, whether the prohibition against abortion is biblically supported, or whether, to use Victoria’s words, it is a tradition of man.
In the usual form of this discussion the only Biblical passage which appears to make explicit reference to the status of the fetus is Exodus 21:22 which from the NIV is given as:
22 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely [a] but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows.
Footnotes:
Exodus 21:22 Or she has a miscarriage
Now some key points:
1) this makes no direct statements about abortion: arguing otherwise is inconsistent with the text as written
2) the NIV seems to capture the historical understanding of this passage: damage to the fetus is not given the same protections as injury to an adult.
And I suggest that the many talmudic efforts to obfuscate and argue around this point are quite simply revisionist efforts to recast the Bible to meet a relatively modern political stance.
I trust we can take this passage out of the discussion then, and see if victoria can provide other passages which explicitly either forbid abortion or explicitly provide full rights for a fetus.
Arguments in the past with victoria on this point have failed to produce such passages. Perhaps Victoria’s more recent research may make Victoria’s argument here with a solider foundation than in the past.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!