The morality of abortion is not a religious belief, any more than the morality of slavery, apartheid, rape, larceny, murder or arson is a religious belief. These are norms of the natural law of mankind and can be legislated even in a completely religionless society.
You cannot be this ignorant.Originally Posted by Deuce
What incentive do a licensed medical professionals across the country have not to nudge their diagnoses a little higher in severity? The stronger the diagnosis, the more justified the professional is to bill a third party for reimbursement, and the more justified s/he is to use a wider range of psychotropic drugs to treat it, and the happier the patient who comes in and alleges "I can't work, the depression's too bad!" will be when the doctor takes him/her seriously.
Why not? We don't allege disability due to colds or flus or other illnesses that clear.I'm not so willing to cast people off merely because their disease is "episodic" or "easy to treat therapeutically".
I can feel your frustration, in multiple ways.You know who shouldn't be on SSDI? My mother. She receives $1500 a month in SSDI, plus other government assistance. Why? Because she's done so many drugs for so long that she is no longer capable of doing anything productive, both because of her mental state and her physical ill health. She completely destroy herself, and now the government rewards her every month with money to continue her bad habits and food stamps she can trade off for more drugs, in addition to "free" healthcare that will likely cost all of us thousands upon thousand of dollars (she's already been hospitalized once for almost a month due to a septic bowel since being on medicaid). She's the real abuser, somebody who made choices that destroyed her and now gets to continue that destruction with government approval, essentially.
Last edited by Neomalthusian; 04-07-12 at 02:53 PM.
Instead of focusing on something so diminutive as food stamps or welfare why don't fiscal conservatives talk more about the massive bloated military spending budget?
"I do not claim that every incident in the history of empire can be explained in directly economic terms. Economic interests are filtered through a political process, policies are implemented by a complex state apparatus, and the whole system generates its own momentum."
It's that people who are supposedly so broke they can't feed there family are encouraged to spend their, supposedly limited discretionary income on "going to the club" rather than saving it, to no longer require food stamps.
To answer Maggie, no they shouldn't being going out for drinks, they're living off public assistance, basically saying they can't afford to feed themselves and their family.
I think our public assistance programs (all of them) should help folks to have a "life," meager though it may be -- not just help them so they won't starve to death.
Thank you, Quazi!
This.Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla
You create a massive disincentive, not to mention a moral hazard when you try to allow others to "have a life" while on the dole. I would be pissed if I saw someone on welfare with a pack of cigarettes and a 40.
If someone wants to give of their own money so that the unfortunate can have creature comforts, that's more than fine. Personally, socialist ideas like that make me retch.