WhatFinger


Preaching from a pretty bizarre gospel

Ed Schultz: Only ‘phony Christians’ oppose ObamaCare



You probably don't want to watch the entire 17 minutes because you can only take so much of a guy yelling at you, especially when he skillfully works in every Democrat talking point from the past several years (even working in the "war on women" line), but from a guy who I guess self-identifies as a born-again Christian, he really needs to get a handle on that whole spirit of anger problem:
I'll take his argument seriously just long enough to point out its obvious flaw. According to Schultz, any Christian should want to give people heatlh care, and opposing ObamaCare means you want to take people's health care away. Well sure, if you see it in those terms, you might as well be turning them over to the Beelzebub Health Insurance Conglomerate to be denied cancer medicine for little Timmy. This Christian opposes ObamaCare for many reasons - the phony cost estimates, the compelling of people to buy insurance when they don't want it, the negative impact on employment markets, etc. - but the biggest reason I oppose ObamaCare is that it doubles down on the very thing that has made health care so hard to afford in the first place. It continues down the road of making everyone rely on third parties to pay their medical bills, which is the very thing that has taken away people's power to simply go and purchase a service and pay the bill.

Support Canada Free Press


You can argue, of course, that health care is too expensive for people to purchase out of pocket, and in the case of catastrophic costs that is certainly true, but day-to-day costs have been made to be so expensive only because the government and insurance companies have butted their way into the economic relationship between patients and caregivers. If the government role was restricted to caring for the poor, and the role of insurance was restricted to catastrophic costs, most people who are not needy could afford their own doctor bills and many of the costs in the system would be wrung out. ObamaCare did exactly the opposite of this and that's why I oppose it. This is an issue with my Christianity? According to the likes of Ed Schultz, the only way to apply Christian faith to public policy is to support governmetn making everything free for as many people as possible, regardless of the overall economic impact and regardless of the impact on those who are forced to provide these services. Since I can find nothing in my Bible that spells out what government economic policy should be, I think I'm on pretty solid ground believing that the free market would deliver access to health care more efficiently than a policy like ObamaCare. Ed is free to disagree on policy grounds, but . . . "phony Christian"? You know, it's funny: I know a lot of Christians who support gay marriage. Ed Schultz also supports gay marriage, and in fact lambastes Christians who do not. That strikes me as a clear doctrinal error, since you can't just ignore 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. But I call these folks Christians who in error on a particular matter. I don't call them "phony Christians" because if they are committed to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, then the Lord would certainly not look kindly on me to say such a thing about them - especially publicly. Ed, take note. You might want to give some attention to that plank in your eye as well.


View Comments

Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored