And then we have stuff like this: In my inbox today was an article from the latest edition of “Leadership Journal” an internet publication of Christianity Today Magazine with an article by Gordon MacDonald on Christians and the health care debate. Here is a quote from the article (which you can access here http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/currenttrendscolumns/leadershipweekly/healthcareandthegospel.html )
“All of this, then, makes me curious as to why my people (the Evangelicals) seem so quiet in the debate on health-care and why the matter has been (fatally?) abandoned to the politicians and those who have a financial position in the matter. Isn’t the national discussion on health-care simply an enlargement of the act of helping needy people to find healing?
I admit to being something like a deer in headlights when I listen to the health-care discussion and try to sort out issues such as public option, pulling the plug on Grandma (who is startlingly close to my age), the role of lobbyists, compulsory insurance … and lots of others. More than once, as I have tried to figure things out, I have found myself to be the disciple of the last person who has spoken.
But the one issue of which I am sure is this: providing access to health-care benefits for every one of my fellow citizens is, at the very least, a Christian position. Despite the Great Recession, we are a wealthy nation and, as Jesus did in his day of visitation, we must do what we can do. In this case it is a matter of defining our national economic priorities so that no one is turned away or shabbily treated when there are physical needs.”
Essentially, Gordon is telling folks, “if it feels good right now, do it.”
Of course, it’s never that simple….is it? Many of us DO do what we can for the less fortunate. It’s called charity and those of us who are blessed with abundance give back to those that aren’t. But it is our choice. I have a problem when the government plays the role of our conscience. Where does it stop? You can say “it stops with healthcare needs”. But what needs? Only matters of life and death? What about a really bad case of acne? And what government run program has ever been truly successful and by whose definition? When I speak with my more liberal friends, we can agree that the rate of increase in healthcare costs is unacceptable. We disagree about how to “fix” it. They want the government to solve the problem and I say that when it comes to business ( healthcare is a business) and the free-market system, the government should keep its hands off and let the market work out a solution. It almost always does. Maybe not on our timing, but it will work itself out. Either way…there is a need for expanding healthcare access to the truly needy and I agree that we should all care about that. I don’t really know how many “truly needy” people there are out there that have no access to healthcare when they have a serious health problem. I’m not sure anyone really knows. As Christians, Americans, residents of a state, city, town or community…we ought to care and do something about it when the need arises. The last thing we should do is let the government find the solution.
The church has gotten way too dependent on the government to do what it should be doing, to the extent that now the Christian Left defines good Christians as those who vote for government programs based on Robin Hood ethics, and other Christians still allow themselves to be made to feel guilty because they don’t want the government to do it.
Along side of this, we have to recognize that top quality health care is no more a “right” than top quality food, top quality housing, top quality clothing, a private exercise therapist, a fancy car, or long paid vacations.
Just as we allow people to buy insurance against other losses that we and they hope they never need, we need that kind of health insurance. But if a wage earner with a family is so foolish as not to buy life insurance and then dies prematurely, we may provide some minimal benefit to keep them from starving, but we don’t put them up in the Hilton with room service and buy them a new car.
This whole mess got distorted when “health insurance” become defined as 100% coverage of everything. A model more along the lines of car insurance (you do the mechanical repairs and maintenance — for which you can also buy plans if you wish — but the insurance is to cover sudden catastrophic, unpredictable events) would be much better.
Our nation has made promises it can’t keep, and is about to make more.
November 6th, 2009 4:32 pm
Very well said.
And then we have stuff like this: In my inbox today was an article from the latest edition of “Leadership Journal” an internet publication of Christianity Today Magazine with an article by Gordon MacDonald on Christians and the health care debate. Here is a quote from the article (which you can access here http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/currenttrendscolumns/leadershipweekly/healthcareandthegospel.html )
“All of this, then, makes me curious as to why my people (the Evangelicals) seem so quiet in the debate on health-care and why the matter has been (fatally?) abandoned to the politicians and those who have a financial position in the matter. Isn’t the national discussion on health-care simply an enlargement of the act of helping needy people to find healing?
I admit to being something like a deer in headlights when I listen to the health-care discussion and try to sort out issues such as public option, pulling the plug on Grandma (who is startlingly close to my age), the role of lobbyists, compulsory insurance … and lots of others. More than once, as I have tried to figure things out, I have found myself to be the disciple of the last person who has spoken.
But the one issue of which I am sure is this: providing access to health-care benefits for every one of my fellow citizens is, at the very least, a Christian position. Despite the Great Recession, we are a wealthy nation and, as Jesus did in his day of visitation, we must do what we can do. In this case it is a matter of defining our national economic priorities so that no one is turned away or shabbily treated when there are physical needs.”
Essentially, Gordon is telling folks, “if it feels good right now, do it.”
November 6th, 2009 10:27 pm
Of course, it’s never that simple….is it? Many of us DO do what we can for the less fortunate. It’s called charity and those of us who are blessed with abundance give back to those that aren’t. But it is our choice. I have a problem when the government plays the role of our conscience. Where does it stop? You can say “it stops with healthcare needs”. But what needs? Only matters of life and death? What about a really bad case of acne? And what government run program has ever been truly successful and by whose definition? When I speak with my more liberal friends, we can agree that the rate of increase in healthcare costs is unacceptable. We disagree about how to “fix” it. They want the government to solve the problem and I say that when it comes to business ( healthcare is a business) and the free-market system, the government should keep its hands off and let the market work out a solution. It almost always does. Maybe not on our timing, but it will work itself out. Either way…there is a need for expanding healthcare access to the truly needy and I agree that we should all care about that. I don’t really know how many “truly needy” people there are out there that have no access to healthcare when they have a serious health problem. I’m not sure anyone really knows. As Christians, Americans, residents of a state, city, town or community…we ought to care and do something about it when the need arises. The last thing we should do is let the government find the solution.
November 6th, 2009 10:36 pm
The church has gotten way too dependent on the government to do what it should be doing, to the extent that now the Christian Left defines good Christians as those who vote for government programs based on Robin Hood ethics, and other Christians still allow themselves to be made to feel guilty because they don’t want the government to do it.
Along side of this, we have to recognize that top quality health care is no more a “right” than top quality food, top quality housing, top quality clothing, a private exercise therapist, a fancy car, or long paid vacations.
Just as we allow people to buy insurance against other losses that we and they hope they never need, we need that kind of health insurance. But if a wage earner with a family is so foolish as not to buy life insurance and then dies prematurely, we may provide some minimal benefit to keep them from starving, but we don’t put them up in the Hilton with room service and buy them a new car.
This whole mess got distorted when “health insurance” become defined as 100% coverage of everything. A model more along the lines of car insurance (you do the mechanical repairs and maintenance — for which you can also buy plans if you wish — but the insurance is to cover sudden catastrophic, unpredictable events) would be much better.
Our nation has made promises it can’t keep, and is about to make more.