A girl with too high a self esteem?
I was surfing links on johns tangent universe when I came across this girl. Apparently she has decided that the compassionate part of christianity is over-rated! Heres a little gem from her blog:
These people should be shot. (For legal reasons, I should probably ask you to not actually shoot them. Or beat them up, even though they really deserve it. So don't. Unfortunately, we don't have any laws against promoting communism.)
She seems fun. She is cute, attending a decent school, apparently loves her brand name clothing, and spends her free time exhorting violence! I often find that it is funner to find these blogs with extreme views, and to try and figure out where these people are coming from than to just read another blog regurgitating what they said on yet another blog (yep thats a pot calling a kettle black alright). So I say say way to go high self esteem gal! Who will she reccomend for death next (pro-choicers? atheists? the french?)? Let's find out!
5 comments:
You left out that she was responding to an autoworker’s criticism about how “immoral” the current health care system. Hot Abercrombie Chick’s translation: “Oh golly, I have to pay an awful lot for insurance and I don't like it. I sure would like the government to force people who are more successful than me to foot the bill!”
I don’t think she wanted the autoworker shot so he’d actually die. Instead, I think she was advocating for him to simply experience a flesh wound so he could go see a private doctor and experience the marvels of medicine in the private sector. Even if he had to pay for treatment out of pocket, at least he wouldn’t have to wait around for several hours like he’d have to in Canada.
You're right I did leave out the fact that she was responding to an american workers desire for adequate health care for himself and his children, and all people in this nation. I am not sure how punishing the working poor by shooting them helps things, but I know a whiny kid with a silver spoon complex when I see one.
I know I should address this directly to Hot Abercrombie Girl (HAG), but let me just state that most people I know who want a socialized health care system don't want just the wealthy to pay for it, but for it to be a piece of payroll for all americans, which under current tax laws would not really affect the rich all that much. The rich have tax shelters and a virtual cornupcopia of other ways to keep the barest minimum from making it into the nations treasury. It is really the people like said auto worker who would foot the bill.
Your argument about Canada is absurd because the last time I went to the doctor on my private HMO plan I sat around for hours, and our working poor regularly sit around for days. I don't know a lot about Canadas health care system, but I do know that most Canadians I talk to are comfortable with it.
The bigger picture however is that the wealthy, and even the middle class can keep their privatized care. I don't think anybody is interested in taking it away. We simply want a very basic level of care for all americans so that my sister and other people that earn wages above the poverty line, but still don't have any health care coverage can go in and get it checked up when they are sick without worrying about paying for the super-inflated doctors premiums that have resulted from our lovely privatized system.
I believe this is the compassionate thing to do and I am more than willing to question the values of HAG or anybody else that believes otherwise.
This is an interesting discussion for me to have at the current time, because dealing with an insurance company after the birth of a healthy child is an expensive NIGHTMARE! Still, I don’t think the government should pay for ANYBODY to have children (or terminate them for that matter). My knee jerk libertarian/conservative views lean heavy on privatization of everything possible (not including things like defense, conservation, and safety related issues). It’s not a question of compassion for me, as much as it is one of public policy. Why is it the government’s job to do anything about healthcare at all? Why is it in our mind that this should be a function of government? I’m of the opinion that caring for the poor would be best left to non-profit organizations and churches. Their function is (should be) one of compassion, and the government’s function should be one of keeping the homeland secure and the roads paved. But maybe that’s just me.
H.A.G.? That’s actually pretty funny.
It is a fine line to draw between libertarianism and anarchy. We all know that complete anarchy isn't a real solution, but neither is total socialism. That is the balance that must be struck by any society. We have all agreed to cooperate towards certain goals. HAG demonizes the "communists" but probably benefits from social programs like a subsidized education. Maybe she could afford to go otherwise, but I know I couldn't.
With the healthcare issue I believe we are rapidly approaching the point where compassionate people, christian or otherwise, have to come to the agreement that sick children in this country regardless of income level must be afforded basic health care. And if we are going to give kids health care why not mommy and daddy? If mommy or daddy gets sick and can't go to work and loses her job, then we all lose. And then what about the elderly? They are already getting socialized health care and it works just fine.
The solution of letting NP's and churches pick up the left behind pieces of a work force that is not being protected by it's employer or a government that doesn't care nearly so much about a healthy society as it does for weapons and war is just not ethical in my mind. There is nothing to make sure that the jews will help christians, or christians will help muslims, except government regulation. Regulation means tax dollars, which means subsidized religion.
I find that idea despicable.
Post a Comment