Big Tea Party Cheers for "let God sort 'em out"

[Land Shark]

Tea Party Alliance Cheered Idea of Letting Uninsured Patients Die

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/tea-party-debate-audience-cheered-idea-of-letting-uninsured-patients-die/?nwltr=politics_featureMore
If it was up to Ron Paul, or many of the Tea Party audience members at Monday night’s GOP presidential debate, churches, not the federal government, would help foot the bill for the medical costs of America’s 50 million residents living without health insurance.
CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer’s hypothetical question about whether an uninsured 30-year-old working man in coma should be treated prompted one of the most boisterous moments of audience participation in the CNN/Tea Party Express.

“What he should do is whatever he wants to do and assume responsibility for himself,” Paul responded, adding, “That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risk. This whole idea that you have to compare and take care of everybody…” The audience erupted into cheers, cutting off the Congressman’s sentence.

After a pause, Blitzer followed up by asking “Congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?” to which a small number of audience members shouted “Yeah!”

Paul, a doctor trained in obstetrics and gynecology, said when he got out of medical school in the 1960s “the churches took care of them.”

Are those who cheered for the idea that government should let people die so the "churches can take care of them" actually involved in a church with health care services offered?

I doubt it, since there's precious few of those church programs.

Talk about an "unfunded mandate" ON THE CHURCHES, of all things.

OR, alternatively, there is no "mandate" at all for the churches, and this comment amounts to code language among Tea Partiers for "let 'em all die and let God sort 'em out."

The small percentage of churches that might help aren't ready, couldn't be ready for years, and when they are ready won't be able to serve more than a few drops in the bucket.

Government programs exist mostly because of all the people who fell through the cracks in the pre-existing church-based welfare system. We should go back to that?

There is some real beauty and merit to the idea of churches and neighbors helping each other through this kind of system -- this is a part of the appeal for some folks on this proposal. But there's simply not enough capacity in the churches, and there won't be enough capacity even if they were to ramp up for this. Churches couldn't cover uninsured Americans' health care even half as good as a drafty paper hospital gown.

So what this means is that devolving health care for the uninsured to churches and turning them away from hospitals is in practical effect the very same thing as saying "let 'em all die and let God sort 'em out."

The only service the uninsured are at all likely to get from a church is funeral. And a shocking number of Tea Partiers are cheering that. God help Tea Party members if they're not active and ready to be very active in church-based health care delivery systems, if they're going to cheer the idea of turning uninsured people away from hospitals and health care:

Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. - Matthew 25:40 (King James)

[Curmudgeoness]

1. And they wonder why God is not answering their prayers.

This was sick on so many levels, and none of those levels had anything to do with their Christian beliefs.

[2 Much Tribulation]

2. +1 "and none of those levels had anything to do with their Christian beliefs." nt

[DearAbby]

4. Because he is weeping.

[Curmudgeoness]

5. Not on Texas, apparently. nt

[Denninmi]

3. Don't forget the other hidden message.

"This can serve as an excuse to funnel money to fundamentalist churches."

Along the lines of Bush's compassionate conservative thing. Where some of these church groups that were supposed to provide social services without strings made attempts to proselytize and convert or refused service to those who wouldn't play along, if I recall correctly.

Also not dissimilar to the abuses in the military contract system where religious groups are getting paid with taxpayer dollars to provide services such as counseling, but are actually proselytizing.

[Curmudgeoness]

8. And if I remember correctly, religious charities now get

government money to support their services. Think about vouchers for religious schools funded by the government. Health services provided by religious organizations receive government money.

Huh? I guess Bush was wrong and headed in the wrong direction on this one.

[kiranon]

6. Need to remove health care as a benefit for all Congress members

Let them buy it on the open market.

[David Sky]

7. Tea bagger Republicans: nothing more than sick, selfish, sadists!

Out to get and keep every last dollar for themselves.

Never give a $ to help others unless they can make a profit or gain fame from the gift.

SICK SELFISH SADISTS!

[OnionPatch]

14. +1

It's really sick that these disgusting people have so much political power. It's starting to get pretty scary, too. Our country has some serious problems. :(

[Mnemosyne]

15. You know my sisters?

And I second your sentiments.

[SnakeEyes]

9. We need to just outlaw religious charities.

This nonsense will all go away.

[Land Shark]

13. Thomas Jefferson founded the world's first secular university - Univ. of Virginia

to move away from purely religious education (including medical education)

[provis99]

10. I guess atheists like me would be out of luck in Paul's ideal world.

"Let the atheists die!"

[Land Shark]

12. And many of the Christians as well, not to mention those of other faiths. nt

[muntrv]

11. Another reminder that the pukes are pro-fetus, not pro-life.

[Land Shark]

16. Unfortunately, too true of too many. nt