Comments on: For I Was Ill and You Cared For Me

By: Richard Snow

Richard Snow — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 23:18:58 +0000

Charity does not come from the point of a gun. Give all you want but don’t force someone else to pay for your healthcare with the threat of imprisonment.

By: David Spenard

David Spenard — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 21:51:16 +0000

Why does anybody in their right mind think that a government-run universal health care program will solve our health care ills? The government is a bloated, corrupt, inefficient bureaucracy that will grow to exorbitant proportions if this debacle is passed, and everyone will suffer because of it. What kind of social justice is that if everyone is knocked down a notch.

The free market system works ‚Äî period. Phil, you mention that the free market has failed us. Well did you ever stop to think that government is the reason for this failure with all of its over regulation and refusal to stop frivolous lawsuits? If the government just got out of our way and let competition between providers open up across the country, then we would have over 1,700 providers to choose from, rather than just a handful in each state. Imagine when that choice is limited to one ‚Äî the government. What do you think will happen then? There is no social justice in that. And I have some news for you — Obama does want socialized medicine. He said it himself. Do some research and find out. He stated that it might take 10 or 20 years, but after health care reform is passed, the goal is a single provider — the government. Get your head out of the sand.

Wake up people. Our rights are being eroded little by little. The government wants to fully control health care, education, and energy. Once that happens, we no longer have our freedoms and we no longer have the United States. Use some common sense. The government is horrible at everything it does, except for the military. Health care run by the government will doom us all.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:44:00 +0000

Roger’s comments are those of the fearful. Did you even read the article, Rog? Some folks, like Roger, only like what is familiar to them. That is fine but some of us like to think outside the box. And outside the talking points.

First off, where did this “80% of Americans are happy with their health insurance” statistic come from? As of right now, 12 Nov 2009, nearly 55% of American support a public option. And that’s the key word, Rog, “Option.” You mention medicare, medicate [sic], social security as the basis for “socialism does not work” but forget to mention the police and fire depts, public schools, post office, and the MILITARY. All are socialist in nature and all are imperative to daily our daily lives.

You say that this reform will “destroy our republic” but fail to indicate how this will happen. This reform is NOT socialism. If anything, it is the free market at its best. Today, you cannot look outside your state for a different health care company; That’s a monopoly and that’s unAmerican. Today, Roger, you could get a call and lose that health care coverage you say is so perfect.

Just because you are refuse to listen to facts, doesn’t change the fact that they are facts. You say “Look at countries that have tried this socialist utopia” and that is a talking point pointing to nowhere. This reform gives us all CHOICE and will bring ALL of our costs down and make it ILLEGAL for insurance companies to drop you for no reason.

Folks, this isn’t about left or right, this is about no longer being picked up by our ankles and shaken for every penny by health care companies.

I hate to say it Roger but, you either are a GOP leader, a health insurance conglomerate CEO or a Right-winger with nothing but Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin and John Boehner in your ear. Wake up, they work for the health care industry not for you.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 20:12:42 +0000

Thou shalt not steal. EVEN if it is to pay for someone’s healthcare. If you want to pay for someone’s coverage, go right ahead. Just don’t steal my money at the point of a gun (ie the IRS) to do it.

By: Pat

Pat — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:11:40 +0000

here are some things that you must know, they are in the bill. It is sad to hear people only use the usual talking points and not really know the truth.
In the bill schools will have health clinics where your child can receive care and referrals for other services without your knowledge due to Privacy laws. If abortion is legal in your state they will have access to this as well as to birth control and ‘counseling’ for many issues. They can ve treated for STD’s and you will not be notified.
Is this what you want under National healthcare?
What in the catechism says we must support Universal healthcare? There are many ways to reform the healthcare system without putting everyone under the same system. The will be reviews of who will get how much care. You think the end of life issues will only apply to the elderly, don’t count on it, it will affect the disabled and the many pre-term babies that require months and years of expensive care. a report from the government yesterday detailed the numbers and the concern over the cost of this care, why would they be concerned now? The politicians know they can draft a bill that has ONLY a new plan that helps with healthcare for the uninsured and those who truly can not afford plans and they can include an opt in from their private plan for those who encounter a catastrophic illness like cancer to ensure they can avoid having to use medicaid or the alternative is to expand the Medicaid program for the unemployed and raise the income limits for low income workers to enroll.
We do not need all of the spending in the bill unnecessary government agencies and programs – we need to help people now not make them wait until 2013. That would be truthfully dealing with the real issue and leave personal choice and ultimately our constitution intact.

By: David

David — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 05:07:49 +0000

This is a nice idea. Take the crumbs from your master’s table when he won;t give you a slice of bread.

Unfortunately, the amendment to exclude abortion from the bill, which would have won the backing of the Bishops, was defeated. Now, if abortion is besides the point, why not allow the amendment to get the important part of your health care bill. The babies who are deemed by their parents birthable, and those already in maturity surely benefit none from the abortion debate, but if abortion is not important, as is being suggested here, why defeat the amendment and solidify the opposition?

By: Stacy

Stacy — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:15:15 +0000

I don’t think people can get too heated about abortion. I am against the death penalty, but I definitely see a distinction between killing someone convicted of a terrible crime and the murder of an innocent child. I became pregnant with my first child my senior year of high school and it changed my life forever, but it makes me sick to think that according to my government her body and her life was just some “choice”. She is a special unique human being and was so from her conception. Roe v. Wade is an insult to both my conscience and my intelligence and to women and children everywhere. The ends do not justify the means. I am not for finding cures to diseases if it means the manufacturing and slaughter of human embryos and I am not for universal health care if even a penny of my husband’s hard earned money goes towards someone else’s artificial contraception or murder of a child (abortion) when I have such strong beliefs against these practices. For the government to take money from my family and put it towards helping the “common good” with complete disregard of personal beliefs is NOT liberty. I don’t mind donating time or money to help the sick or people in need. Charity should be a choice, that’s why the charitable are usually called “volunteers”, but forced charity? What ever happened to free will?

By: Laura Lockett

Laura Lockett — Sat, 19 Sep 2009 13:03:54 +0000

If I suffer, if I die, to save one inncocent life from abortion then I have carried my cross. Catholics stand firm and do not be swayed by the government!

By: patrick

patrick — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 02:57:31 +0000

To read an account of the "crowding out" of private compassion during Hurricane Katrina, see this article.

By: Andrea G.

Andrea G. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:10:42 +0000

Great article! Thanks for your wonderful work!

By: Josemaria

Josemaria — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:45:29 +0000

Personally(from a Filipino Catholic perspective)I feel that health care should NOT include abortion and euthanasia,then it can be extended to everybody.Also Health Care Should be Community-Based,not medical corporate- based

By: Roger

Roger — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 12:51:47 +0000

All I see is misguided compassion. To say that we can use government to be compassionate towards are fellow citizens is absurd and naive.
Never mind who‚Äôs going to pay for it, social security, Medicare Medicate, and everything else is going bankrupt and if any one knows anything, socialism does not work.
To destroy what we have, over 80% of Americans are happy with their health insurance now, and have an inept government take over my health care will be suicide.
It will destroy our republic and everyone will be dependant on Uncle Sam for everything.
I say take care of the one‚Äôs that don‚Äôt have health care and leave the rest of us alone.
Don‚Äôt let anyone tell you that you are not compassionate about your fellow human being due to you‚Äôre against this socialist health care scam. I‚Äôm a Catholic that knows history and I know that this scam will fail. Look to the countries that have tried this socialist utopia and time and time again, it‚Äôs failed.

By: Max Lindenman

Max Lindenman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:03:27 +0000

No, Patrick, countries and corporations can’t be compassionate. But both can follow policies that are informed by compassion. This is especially true in the case of republic, whose policies represent, within certain boundaries, the will of its citizens.

By: patrick

patrick — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 05:29:18 +0000

I read this heartfelt article and the thoughtful comments with some trepidation, seeming to be so off-the-page compared with most of the respondents. It seems to me that all of your sentiments start with an assumption that may not stand up to examination. A company cannot have compassion; a government cannot have compassion. Only people can have compassion. There are individuals within both corporations and governments who are compassionate, but to assign that quality to an entity is fraught with danger. Many of us want “universal health care”, but who among you have offered to pay the medical bills of someone who couldn’t afford to pay them? THAT’s compassion. Donating money to a Catholic hospital is compassionate; volunteering is even better. Assigning our compassion over to the government is misguided. Governments are best at governing: they are very good at telling people what to do. Please read any of the current health care bills wending their way through Congress (the Executive branch does not have its own bill). There are pages and pages of what you can and can’t do, what the penalties and fees are for incorrect behavior, eye-splitting specifications about which current or new panel will make decisions about who gets what. What you won’t see is compassion — that’s not what the government is about. So … when you find out (and you will) that you are taxed to fully fund abortions, along with whatever policies well-connected interest groups can add on, but the general level of care is universally poorer than it was before, don’t bring up compassion — you’re talking to the wrong people.

By: John

John — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:16:42 +0000

Where is the money coming from? In the midst of the worst recession in memory and in the wake of our recent financial collapse, is this the time for such an ambitious and expensive undertaking? And where is the mandate for such a broad overhaul of our health care system? At best the country is divided on the issue, at worst health care reform would be soundly defeated if put to a popular vote. Where in our Constitution does it say that the proper role of the Federal government is to manage health care?

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:58:08 +0000

Curious… since national taxes are currently being used to fund, arguably, at least two wars, for which thousands have died from both sides, should not the anti-abortionists who claim they won’t pay for health care if abortions are included refuse to pay their taxes? Is not the life of our soldiers as important?

By: Niall McShane

Niall McShane — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:59:12 +0000

I was also struck by Senator Kennedy’s funeral mass today and by the fact that they used the same Gospel passage that forms the basis for this blog. At mass tonight, I realized that the readings for this Sunday are all on the theme of social justice. I was particularly struck by the line from the second reading that says “Be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding yourselves” and I resolved to create a petition to our local congressman asking, not that he support a specific plan for universal health care but that he publically support the goal of universal healthcare. I have created the petition, basing it on the excerpt from Matt 25 used above and I intend to ask permission from our pastor to solicit signatures for this petition at masses in the next few weeks. I will also try to approach other parishes in the area. This is a tangible way that we can try to change to tone of the debate on the healthcare issue. Lets try to get a consensus that universal healthcare, particularly in a country as welthy as the US, is an essential indicator of the commitment that we must have, as christians, for the least of our brothers and sisters.

By: Nancy McDonald

Nancy McDonald — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:47:56 +0000

I am watching the funeral mass of Sen. Teddy Kennedy as I read this. What a beautiful statement of love and compassion and a clear telling of the reason for universal health care. I shared it on FB immediately. Thank you so much.

By: Niall McShane

Niall McShane — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 02:17:02 +0000

I was delighted to find such a clear, coherent article on the heated and complex issue of the health care debate. I am intrigued by the comments of those who oppose the views expressed in this article. Based on their logic, then Catholics should also strongly advocate against every bill that contains any provision for the funding of prisons in which the death penalty is carried out, every bill that includes funding for military operations that kill and main countless thousands of innocent civilians in addition to their intended targets. Also, as Amie points out, where does it say in Jesus’s teaching that our compassion and our concern for the protection of life ends at birth? There are huge social problems in this country and around the world with infant mortality, poverty, lack of education, lack of access to clean water as well as lack of access to even the most basic levels of medical care. Why are these concerns subverted to the one concern of abortion. I am not saying that abortion is right but it certainly isn’t the only issue.

By: Meryl Jenks

Meryl Jenks — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 04:07:36 +0000

Art, were you covering your eyes while reading this?

By: ART

ART — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 05:31:07 +0000

Peace be with you,

PLEASE: The ends do not justify ANY means! Yes, we should all have proper health care but not if we pay for it by allowing and by paying for and endorsing the taking of human life. Abortion is the non-negotiable part of the program. The unborn need to be part of true “universal” health care. Blessed Mother Theresa said it best when she said it’s a tragedy that a child must die so we can live in luxury. Regarding Matthew 25.- whenever you did it to the least of these, you did it to me. Anyone you want to dress it up, any time we actively prevent one life from reaching it’s potential, stop it’s growth, ABORT IT, we do that to Christ. I suggest ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH by another great Pope, Paul IV. In that encyclical he outlines and, sadly, predicted the horror of the past 40 years after birth control and by extension, abortion was accepted by our culture. As for me and mine, we will continue to serve the Lord Jesus Christ and follow his commandment to love one another as he loved us. Promoting life and the fullness, even in a broken, fallen world is the highest expression of that Divine Love. I pray you can see that.

By: Phil Fox Rose

Phil Fox Rose — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:15:47 +0000

Fr. Lance, Amie’s comments are certainly in line with my thinking, but if you’ll forgive my picking apart your response, I think it is illustrative of what concerns me about some Catholics’ response to universal coverage. My remarks are not a personal attack; they focus only on what you are saying here. I respect your right to your opinions. But I think this is helpful.

a) You paint those you disagree with as not caring about life, using the caricature of someone “cooly and calculatingly” sneaking abortion into the health care proposal. By thus dismissing the advocates of universal coverage as abortion-loving amoral tricksters, you then don’t have to listen to and be challenged by their arguments for charity.

b) You misrepresent the current situation, saying the bill “allows” abortion. Any law “allows” everything it doesn’t explicitly prohibit. As I understand it, what is really going on here is an argument to add something to the bill to make it impossible to add abortion services in the future. The current bill does not include abortion services. Period. It “allows” for the possibility because it doesn’t explicitly forbid the possibility. I don’t know what went into the current language, but my best guess is that this was a hard-won compromise between those who wanted abortion services in the bill and those who couldn’t abide that. So the bill does not include them, but not explicitly forbidding their ever being included was a way of reaching an agreement. Using the language you do, which is straight off anti-universal-coverage talking point sheets, suggests the people who drafted the bill actively included something pro-abortion, in order to make it sound more nefarious. There is a perfectly valid technical political debate that is worth having here, but let’s be honest about it.

c) Out of nowhere you suggest “the possible rationing of healthcare to seniors and disabled people.” This is a talking point from the health insurance indsutry’s anti-universal coverage memos. And it is absurd on its face — it is nearly Orwellian doublespeak. The advocates for universal coverage want above all else to improve access to health care for the underrepresented. That the bill would reduce available care for the disabled is laughable. Saying it about seniors is fear-mongering, as a deliberate tactic to swing those voters against any change at all from what they already have, which serves the insurance companies alone. Apparently, no coverage for those who have none is OK, though?

d) The last half of your comment has nothing to do with the current proposals or my article, but is basically an explanation of why you don’t trust anyone on this issue. And this really gets to my point. You give a snapshot history of deceits surrounding Roe. With all due respect, if you are still fighting against 40 years ago, then you are not present for this debate in this time, and that is why your arguments are off-base. And you will never be able to see and be challenged by the good points the other side might be making if you’re not listening to them, but instead replaying an old battle.

I appreciate your taking the time to comment on my article. I hope you take my response in the same spirit.

By: LAS

LAS — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:12:55 +0000

Thank you for so eloquently stating what I have been pondering throughout this debate!

By: Phil Fox Rose

Phil Fox Rose — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:08:00 +0000

Psychodoc, I will not spare you “the “why can‚Äôt we all get along?” dialogues. I consider it a foundational principle of Christian morality. Perhaps you’ve heard that you should love your enemies, turn the other cheek, and that our expressions of brotherly love is how the world will know we are Christians? I just attended a wonderful talk from my Archbishop Dolan, in which he stressed Pope Benedict’s desire to repair the rift in the Catholic world between the pro-life and social justice sides by reframing it all back where it belongs under Love in Truth and Truth in Love. We are on the same side. We might get more worked up about one thing or another, but we are all trying imperfectly to discern God’s will for us and to show our love for our neighbor by improving our community, to respond to the needs for charity and love all around us.

By: amiehartnett

amiehartnett — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:13:10 +0000

@Fr. Lance – I cannot address your statement on behalf of the author, but my comments @ psychdoc still ring true: If babies are saved and born – we need to care for them! My continued frustration with the healthcare issue is that I get the feeling only UNBORN babies are cared about by those who protest; not the millions of children (and their parents)with no healthcare, who can die from minor illnesses that go unchecked due to no prevention.

As a faithful Catholic Christian parent AND a Pro-life person, I find nothing life-affirming about such a rigid position.

By: Fr. Lance Campo

Fr. Lance Campo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:55:03 +0000

I am disappointed that you feel that abortion the direct taking of a human unborn boy or girl is not something to get heated up about. Those who do not see any moral problem with abortion wish to cooly and calculatingly add it into government programs and now even into private programs which will make everyone who pays taxes and pays for insurance will be participants in this intrinsic evil. If people had not shouted and resisted this plan would have already been approved. They claim that pro-lifers are “bearing false witness” about the possible results; but reputable news agencies have now agreed and reported that abortion is allowed in the current bills. This is not to mention the problems with the possible rationing of healthcare to seniors and disabled people. Those who engineered the campaign to legalize abortion have admitted that they lied using false data about the deaths of women to turn public opinion and sympathy their way. Then the lawyers and judges used sneaky tactics of redefining “health reasons” in one judgment to completely strip any restrictions on abortionfor all nine months of pregnancy in Roe v. Wade. People still think that abortion is illegal in the third trimester.

By: amiehartnett

amiehartnett — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 19:19:32 +0000

@Psychdoc: don*t you think that extending health care coverage to the uninsured might help prevent abortions, because those in a quandary due to no coverage would now have access to prenatal, maternal, and pediatric care? Its not enough to let the babies be born; we have to care for them once they are here.

By: Ellen

Ellen — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:53:27 +0000

I so agree with you Phil and thank you. I have printed your column and feel armed myself to speak up more, defend the truth and remember that for all to have the opportunity to have health care is just the right thing to do.

By: Max Lindenman

Max Lindenman — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:12:22 +0000

Psychdoc: usually I’m the first to argue that theology, like pornography, is best left to professionals. However, I agree with Phil that some universal health care coverage is more in line with basic Catholic social teachings than none at all. Picking and choosing, as you put, may not be ideal, but it’s better than turning it all down flat.

By: Psychdoc

Psychdoc — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 15:14:09 +0000

O my Father! In the same encyclical, BXVI tells us the human dignity begins in the womb and ends with natural death. So spare me the “why can’t we all get along?” dialogues. The bishops only have it partly right. All mandated funds should also be removed for contraception, sterilization procedures, and human embryonic stem cell research. If any part of the Health Care plan pays for these abominations, then the whole HC plan in intrinsically evil. The Magisterium has been clear. Recent Popes have been clear. Read Evangelium Vitae and Humanae Vitae for further Catholic teaching on this. Sorry, folks, you can’t pick and choose. What about “when did we see you in the womb, and not try to save you from death?” There will be justice for those 50 million babies killed. And, I, for one, will not pay one single dollar of taxes for anyone’s abortion. God bless you all.