Leftism and the Gospel: How Wide the Divide?

[_Themis]

This is the only statement you've made thus far, in your entire cornucopia of extracts from Wikipedia and transcripts from old Countdown with Keith Olbermann episodes that have even the slightest empirical or serious analytical content.

The claims for the superiority of socialist health care systems have been debunked as the statistical hokum they are for a very long time, and I've fielded these arguments for years here and in other forums. I'm not going to bother digging up and linking to the serious sources available as you will not read them, and if you do read them, simply dismiss them as "biased" because they do not share your bias.

Its not worth the cerebral cortex damage. Do your own homework and look at both sides of the issue in a rigorous and thorough manner. Its not that difficult.

I don't blame you for running away. I at least provided some sources.

[_Droopy]

Droopy, your talk-radio education is most magnificently shown when you eulogize the Constitution while demonizing torts, which are suits at common law, protected by the 7th Amendment.

I've never demonized torts. I've demonized the rogue American product liability (especially in its class action mode) medical malpractice, and special interest ideological lawsuit lottery industry for its frequent perversions and corruptions of the legal system in feverish pursuit of wealth and power.

[_Droopy]

Marx' system involves the utter destruction of economic, social, and political freedom as a precondition of the achievement of the actual state of affairs sought in socialist theory, which is not care of the poor, per se, but equality of economic condition across an entire society,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Order

Smith was troubled because of the number of members joining the church in poverty in Kirtland, Ohio. Revenue was needed for the church to publish books and tracts. At this time, Smith and Rigdon were both in economic distress. Smith and his wife Emma lived on the Morley farm for a period of time.

On February 4, 1831, Smith said he had received a revelation calling Edward Partridge to be the first bishop of the church. Five days later, on February 9. 1831, Smith described a second revelation detailing the Law of Consecration.

Relevance?

[_Droopy]

Has anyone so far found a substantive distinction between what Droopy says the United Order is and Droopy's understanding of communism other than his preference to be ruled by priesthood leaders instead of a secular government?

Nope. But I earnestly plead with him to show the difference. I'm willing to be schooled.

I doubt you are educable in this area, and I doubt you have any desire to be. See Enrichment Section L of the Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual for a substantial elucidation of the consistent teachings of the Brethren on the subject over the course of the 20th century, especially since the 30s.

[_Melchett]

However, Melchett is mistaken to relate his own experiences with his country's health care system.

He may not be. What he is woefully mistaken about is the nature of the system itself and its overall impact on the quality and availability of care for the broad mass of the population.

He also appears to believe that health care in Britain is "free," which is indicative of a degree of economic illiteracy and general intellectual slovenliness historically standard on this message board.

Really? You state that I am woefully mistaken? Have you ever visited the UK, and seen for yourself the National Health Service? Have you had conversations with staff and patients? Really Droopy, blindly using what is anecdotal 'evidence' as fact does not make you an expert. You think the quality is lower in the UK than the US? Tell that to the many patients in the US who are suddenly evicted from their wonderful US hospital when the money runs out.

You obviously don't really get the concept of free either. It is paid for as I described, but it is available to all, whether or not they have contributed to the system. There are no hidden costs or a bill when you leave.

I'm pleased that you are giving me a lesson in the intellectual slovenliness that on this board.

[_Droopy]

This is the only statement you've made thus far, in your entire cornucopia of extracts from Wikipedia and transcripts from old Countdown with Keith Olbermann episodes that have even the slightest empirical or serious analytical content.

The claims for the superiority of socialist health care systems have been debunked as the statistical hokum they are for a very long time, and I've fielded these arguments for years here and in other forums. I'm not going to bother digging up and linking to the serious sources available as you will not read them, and if you do read them, simply dismiss them as "biased" because they do not share your bias.

Its not worth the cerebral cortex damage. Do your own homework and look at both sides of the issue in a rigorous and thorough manner. Its not that difficult.

I don't blame you for running away. I at least provided some sources.

I've had long enough experience debating people like you, Themis, that I have no illusions that the call for sources is nothing but a ruse. You can do your own homework well enough. I've been over and over this issue at length, in any case, in the past.

The woeful and shameful state of the British and Canadian healthcare systems compared to the U.S. system is common knowledge for anyone who wishes to go outside the mainstream media/special pleading government insider box and do their own research.

The empirical and statistical facts are easily within reach.

[_Droopy]

To anyone who actually understands both Marxist doctrine and gospel doctrine, the glaring philosophical mistake Analytics continues to make here is more than obvious....

The only thing I did was quote some verses about the United Order, and quote Karl Marx. That is all I did. In what way is it a "glaring philisophical mistake" to quote the D&C, Marion Romney, and Karl Marx?

Don't be coy, Analytics, you don't do it well. Leave that to professional rhetorical pranksters like Darth.

[_Themis]

I've had long enough experience debating people like you, Themis, that I have no illusions that the call for sources is nothing but a ruse. You can do your own homework well enough. I've been over and over this issue at length, in any case, in the past.

The woeful and shameful state of the British and Canadian healthcare systems compared to the U.S. system is common knowledge for anyone who wishes to go outside the mainstream media/special pleading government insider box and do their own research.

The empirical and statistical facts are easily within reach.

Keep on running Droopy. :)

[_Themis]

You obviously don't really get the concept of free either. It is paid for as I described, but it is available to all, whether or not they have contributed to the system. There are no hidden costs or a bill when you leave.

Not to mention that the clinics, Doctors, etc work for a profit. Most doctors and nurses do not work for the Government.

[Guest]

Really? You state that I am woefully mistaken? Have you ever visited the UK, and seen for yourself the National Health Service? Have you had conversations with staff and patients? Really Droopy, blindly using what is anecdotal 'evidence' as fact does not make you an expert. You think the quality is lower in the UK than the US? Tell that to the many patients in the US who are suddenly evicted from their wonderful US hospital when the money runs out.

Two possibilities here: The first is that you are a liar flailing wildly to defend an ideology that has no rational basis for its defense. The second, and I hope the correct one, is that you are a herd animal of the textbook kind produced by infantilizing nanny states such as the once Great Britain who is quite willing to give away his own liberties and those of his fellow citizens to crawl on his belly to the state with his hands out to claim the cradle to grave security he has come to believe is his due for having done nothing more than be born.

My wife just had a critical and fairly long term illness, requiring expensive and intensive treatment. We have no insurance, and the hospital knew that at the outset. The treatment continued until it was medically realistic to send her home, and not before. You have not the slightest idea what you're talking about, and at the level of economic illiteracy at which you are laboring, you are not likely to understand either the theoretical or practical aspects of why socialized medicine debases and degrades the quality of care for most people and why a market based system is, as in most other areas, vastly preferable. Mouthing anti-capitalist platitudes osmotically absorbed from the BBC isn't going to get you very far.

The evidence of the sorry and dangerous state of the NHS is mountainous; and can be found in profusion on the Internet, as well as in those things called books, which are actually written by non-leftists on occasion.

You obviously don't really get the concept of free either. It is paid for as I described, but it is available to all, whether or not they have contributed to the system. There are no hidden costs or a bill when you leave.

Oh, someone "doesn't get" the concept of "free", that's for sure. Most Eloi rarely do.

I'm pleased that you are giving me a lesson in the intellectual slovenliness that on this board.

The real lessons are in the lower Kingdoms. That's where the rubber meets the proverbial road.