I'm talking about the Roe vs. Wade court. That was in 1973.The Republicans have tried to appoint pro life justices. Dems block them. Republicans have appointed moderates only after ultra conservative being blocked. (Reagan eres and forward)
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I'm talking about the Roe vs. Wade court. That was in 1973.The Republicans have tried to appoint pro life justices. Dems block them. Republicans have appointed moderates only after ultra conservative being blocked. (Reagan eres and forward)
If you are against feeding, housing and giving medical care for the poor and the elderly this is an accurate criticism. As I've said here before, I would far prefer that the church do these things. That will cost your church $200,000/year for medical care alone. An impossible solution is not a solution.
Buying medical insurance is NOT the same thing as providing medical care. Why do you think buying medical insurance is an act of charity?
The same as giving someone in need money ... it helps them in a need they cannot provide for themselves.
Nobody NEEDS health insurance, but people might need medical care.
If someone needed transportation to and from a job a good thing to buy would be auto insurance?
Nobody NEEDS health insurance, but people might need medical care.
If someone needed transportation to and from a job a good thing to buy would be ...
Well if you want to bankrupt yourself go ahead. Of course we do have people who die because they do not have health insurance and wait too long before going to a doctor or hospital. I saw that happen at the free clinic I worked at as a volunteer.
Do you have health insurance?
The parties have shifted since 1973. In 1973, the parties in no way resembled what they are today. You want to go all the way back to the Civil War era, or do you want to deal with what the parties NOW believe.I'm talking about the Roe vs. Wade court. That was in 1973.
Of course I have health insurance. And yes, I wish more people had it. But to say that the best use of a church's charity outreach is to buy poor people health insurance is asinine.
Poor people probably aren't concerned about bankruptcy. Go ask some poor, needy people what kind of charity they want and I bet health insurance doesn't make the top five things.
I'm talking about the Roe vs. Wade court. That was in 1973.
My brother didn't have medical insurance for 15 years because he pastored a poor church that barely paid him and gave him no insurance. Buying insurance was very expensive due to a pre-existing condition. He had to face a very serious operation without insurance. Have you or anyone you know ever been in this situation? Buying him health insurance would most certainly have been an act of charity. He has 3 Masters degrees and left a lucrative position as a corporate financial analyst to enter the SBTS and become a minister. The surgeon respected what he had done and DONATED his services for a 6 1/2 hour thoracic aortic aneurysm operation. Most of those without insurance would not get that kind of benevolence. Would you like to face a life-threatening $50,000 operation without insurance?Buying medical insurance is NOT the same thing as providing medical care. Why do you think buying medical insurance is an act of charity?
My brother didn't have medical insurance for 15 years because he pastored a poor church that barely paid him and gave him no insurance. Buying insurance was very expensive due to a pre-existing condition. He had to face a very serious operation without insurance. Have you or anyone you know ever been in this situation? Buying him health insurance would most certainly have been an act of charity. He has 3 Masters degrees and left a lucrative position as a corporate financial analyst to enter the SBTS and become a minister. The surgeon respected what he had done and DONATED his services for a 6 1/2 hour thoracic aortic aneurysm operation. Most of those without insurance would not get that kind of benevolence. Would you like to face a life-threatening $50,000 operation without insurance?
If you don't have insurance or areNobody NEEDS health insurance, but people might need medical care.
If someone needed transportation to and from a job a good thing to buy would be auto insurance?
I agree. That's why I think America should provide an acceptable safety net like all other advanced countries. Our health care ranks about 18th in the world barely above Cuba.I think the church providing health insurance for people would be money better spent on actual, tangible needs, rather than an "in case something happens" scenario.
Would you like to face a life-threatening $50,000 operation without insurance?
I did in fact face surgery with a hospital Bill of $49,000.
If you are against feeding, housing and giving medical care for the poor and the elderly this is an accurate criticism. As I've said here before, I would far prefer that the church do these things. That will cost your church $200,000/year for medical care alone. An impossible solution is not a solution.
Us charity guys are called followers of Jesus.I did in fact face surgery with a hospital Bill of $49,000. I had insurance, but did not know it would pay only $6,000 of that Bill. I argued with a Baylor rep about it and offered to start paying (don't remember my exact bid), and she said, "That is not within hour regulatory standards." So I asked how much minimum, and she said (I think) $300 a month. I said, "That is not within MY regulatory standards." So only then did she state a much lower figure. But tmalss, I paid for a year, first to the hospital then to a collection agency, then I stopped getting statements, so I stopped paying. So I think one way or another, healthcare IS a charity paid by everybody-- which is what you charity guys want.
OK. What have the Republicans done to make that happen? Besides a lot of people getting help from the government are deserving people. Would you have supported kicking my 95 year old aunt who taught the deaf for 30 years out on the street because she outlived her money (lived to be 102 with severe Alzheimer's for the last 5 years)?I am for making them self sufficient rather than dependent on the government for the rest of their lives. Dems are wanting people to be dependent on government.
OK. What have the Republicans done to make that happen? Besides a lot of people getting help from the government are deserving people. Would you have supported kicking my 95 year old aunt who taught the deaf for 30 years out on the street because she outlived her money (lived to be 102 with severe Alzheimer's for the last 5 years)?
The Democrats want the poor to stay poor so they will vote Democrat.OK. What have the Republicans done to make that happen? Besides a lot of people getting help from the government are deserving people. Would you have supported kicking my 95 year old aunt who taught the deaf for 30 years out on the street because she outlived her money (lived to be 102 with severe Alzheimer's for the last 5 years)?