Dad ‘Furious’ After He Switches to Obamacare Only to Find It Didn’t Cover His Children

reply to post by ThichHeaded


Well should it not be your constitutional right to not wear a seat belt? I mean if you are not wearing a seat belt and were killed, was that not your right to choose not to wear one? Nope, even though you not wearing your seat belt will physically effect no one other than yourself, you still get a fine for not doing so.

I fail to see how your constitution argument has anything to do with people who are breaking the law by being in this country, and getting free health care, and us being required to have insurance. You still do have the right not to have it, but if you don't you will face a penalty.

kurthall
reply to post by ThichHeaded

 

Well should it not be your constitutional right to not wear a seat belt? I mean if you are not wearing a seat belt and were killed, was that not your right to choose not to wear one? Nope, even though you not wearing your seat belt will physically effect no one other than yourself, you still get a fine for not doing so.

I think you may be assuming a lot to think many who'd be here, supported seat belt or helmet laws. Now, do people support using them? Well, I sure hope so. Common sense isn't common, but that's just basic. Being big brothered on it? That's more than a little unnecessary, whether using them is good or not. Government oversteps when they protect me from myself and I have the right to be stupid to my OWN darwin award, should I choose to take dumb to new heights in some way.

There is also a profound difference. I don't have to wear a seat belt and follow that law just to legally live inside the United States. Prior to Obamacare, in fact, there was nothing I HAD to do but live, pay taxes and die, as the old saying goes on that. Paying taxes only came ...until now ...with money gained or money spent. It's simply existing and living here now, as they'd have it.

Even some of us average people are starting to question the value of remaining residents here vs. quality of life to live elsewhere.

That is a total Sea Change and new concept in American society...

kurthall
reply to post by ThichHeaded

 

Well should it not be your constitutional right to not wear a seat belt? I mean if you are not wearing a seat belt and were killed, was that not your right to choose not to wear one? Nope, even though you not wearing your seat belt will physically effect no one other than yourself, you still get a fine for not doing so.

The constitution was founded so that there would be limited governement.. It would be up to the states to decide what is right for each state.. The government was only there to to do very little.. So these laws like dont smoke weed, wear a seatbelt, obamacare, and paying income tax are all basically going against what the constitution stands for.. The only reason we are paying Income tax is because of a resolution called the federal reserve act that was passed in 1913... Ironic that bill.. and soon after that came the SS #'s...

I fail to see how your constitution argument has anything to do with people who are breaking the law by being in this country, and getting free health care, and us being required to have insurance. You still do have the right not to have it, but if you don't you will face a penalty.

kurthall
and that is go through the process and learn our constitution

The irony in your statements is all.. Maybe it it you who should read it again to know what the constitution says.. There are a lot of things our government does that does against the constitution.. You know federal reserve, wars without an act of congress, Obamacare... All kinda things.. Obamacare is just one of those unconstitutional deals..

Or I can just pull up the old statement RP said..

LeatherNLace
I just took a look at this guy's Facebook page. He is a pastor with a degree from a seminary school and is a fan of Mitt Romney, Rush Limbaugh and Duck Dynasty. Then, of all places to go to tell his story, he chooses to tell his story to The Blaze (a right-wing site started by Glenn Beck).

Nope, no bias there...not at all.

www.facebook.com...

So because of his affiliation he must be lying right? I mean, come on...he is a fan of Mitt Romney, Limbaugh and Duck Dynasty! He must be biased!

Yep and you are showing no bias at all in your opinion to the matter either. All is right with the world and damn him even if it turns out to be true...he is a fan of people you despise!

So we have somebody who somehow must use two different insurance plans for his family and this was somehow determined by a computer program and doesn't seem to have a choice?

Sounds like they screwed up the *Artificial* "Intellegence"

Two words to describe Obamacare.Cluster F**k.This administration wavers between totally deceitful to ridiculously incompetent.

kurthall
I fail to see how your constitution argument has anything to do with people who are breaking the law by being in this country, and getting free health care, and us being required to have insurance. You still do have the right not to have it, but if you don't you will face a penalty.

Who is getting "free" health care? All things aside, regarding seat-belts and helmets, those are choices made my free people to choose to engage in an activity -- in which a find is imposed if they do not follow an imposed regulation. For instance, I am not required to own automobile insurance unless I own and operate an automobile; the same said of seat-belts and helmets (if I were riding a motorcycle and in a State that regulated such a use.)

In terms of health-care, I am, because I am a "tax-payer", required to obtain and maintain a Government approved plan or face the penalty -- no other activity of just living and breathing requires such an intrusion upon the People. When will it be deemed that we must have "life insurance"? Or to maintain our health-insurance we have to have a gross purchase of 50% organic foods? Or we must...

See the difference?

nugget1
What's even more amazing to me is the fact that our 'potus' still has supporters. The worst is yet to come, I fear.

You can't win when you have a guy like Obama running the show. His supporters are just mindlessly devoted to him and no matter how many times you show them that he is wrong, he's a pathological liar and so on, they either ignore it or blame it on "obstruction".

What else are you supposed to do about politicians that try to impose things on you by government mandate but do your best to obstruct them any way you legally can?

reply to post by ketsuko


More to the point...where was all the outrage when Private Insurance companies were dropping families left and right pre ACA?

I get it...ACA is not perfection! The right is correct!

But when a policy or law impacts MILLIONS of Americans...shouldn't we be examining it's effects in the context of MILLIONS of Americans vs. finding single cases and hoping to extrapolate over the massive numbers it impacts?

Lord help me...if only the right wing made a story out of every time private insurance dropped a family after a cancer diagnosis in the past the net itself would freeze up.

reply to post by Indigo5

Lord help me...if only the right wing made a story out of every time private insurance dropped a family after a cancer diagnosis in the past the net itself would freeze up.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of it all!!! The right-wingers are friggnin' hypocrites.

Indigo5
reply to post by ketsuko

 

More to the point...where was all the outrage when Private Insurance companies were dropping families left and right pre ACA?

When private companies were shutting people out of care and turning them down, I don't recall a shortage of outrage..but I'll take your word on perceptions and how we each view past events.

At that point though, it was private business screwing private citizens ..and it's one of many many industries that's happening in.

Now? It's GOVERNMENT turning the screws by way of regulatory changes forcing plans to discontinue coverage or discontinue everything, all together. As Bill Clinton himself was saying here recently.....The Government had a promise to the American People about keeping your plan if you liked it. The Government has been the instrument of breaking that promise. The Government, not the private business, is most directly responsible for making right what they made wrong here.

LeatherNLace

There Fixed that for ya.. That is not the issue, its people not listening to the constitution and telling others what to do..

Read my above thought on that...

Its not someone elses business whether I need to have ins or I dont.. I should have the choice to decide whether I want to or not.. I dont need to be thrown in jail because I do not have ins..

But nanny state is fine with you.. Meh whatever..

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I think people are missing a very important point in this discussion - how many minor children are being put into a federal welfare program? And what are the real reasons? A parent is not responsible for their child anymore? And any health decisions that need to be made in the care of that child?

The state/fed now makes decisions in regard to your child's health care.

How many vaccines, abortions, contraceptives are your childern going to be given at the public school, without your knowledge?

They have a sheet load of HPV vaccines that need to be used up.

And some people think that he is so unpopular because of his complexion. Imagine their surprise. Oh my.

reply to post by LeatherNLace


ok then.....Can you find anything in his story that isnt TRUE?!

Just because you dont like that hes a conservative or he chose to tell it to a news company that would actually CARRY the story makes no difference...

Now if you could find anything that proved it wasnt true, that would mean something....

Other then that, your bias holds no weight

It's his job to figure this stuff out not anyone else. Plenty of people have had issues the start of the year with coverage because its scrambled right now. But in time it will workout. Just got to do a little work yourself, which most people are not use to doing....