Concerning "health care":
Do you want government involved in your "health?"
Who won't get "health care" from the government. Those "who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens." (Ezekiel Emanuel, a senior counselor on health care policy at the White House Office of Management and Budget under Obama) We are not just talking about physical health here (which is bad enough) but also about mental and social health, all tied to the persons contribution to social (socialist) cause. This is language as deadly as "do whatever it takes" from a government official.
I have often said that the money you have in the bank is stored up drug money. What I mean by that is that pleasure is a drug and the money we store up for our future is usually for pleasure. The environment we live in stimulates our nervous system in many different ways. Our "human nature" is to "approach pleasure and avoid pain." Our nervous system is the reason for this behavior (which we have practiced from our time in the womb on). Dopamine is a neurotransmitter associated with pleasure. Any time we touch, taste, smell, see, or hear something in the environment, which our nervous system recognizes (God designed it to recognize) as pleasurable our nature is to approach it to attain it or retain it to initiate or sustain the sensation of pleasure. The same is true for pain, except in that case we try to avoid it (although pain can be sometimes pleasurable and pleasure can be sometimes painful so it is a complex process). It is our carnal nature to therefore "want" whatever it is in the environment which stimulates dopamine emancipation within us (in the synaptic gap in the nervous system to the brain and in the brain). We actively look for it (the object of gratification which stimulates dopamine emancipation) and put into action a plan to apprehend it to "get more." Thus money represents stored up action for more pleasure in the future. It will even stimulate pleasure within us without it even being used (called "the love of money," i.e. the root of all evil). By storing it up you can then use if for trips to enjoy food, sunsets, and people's complements ("the approval of men," probably the most intoxicating stimulant of all), all stimulants of dopamine emancipation (pleasure).
The "old" school, which depends upon faith, belief, obedience, and which uses chastening to maintain obedience at least, places getting the job done over the pleasure or pain of the moment. The "new" school says "The job is not worth doing if I don't get some pleasure in the here-and-now from doing it." The difference between the two being didactic thinking vs. dialectic thinking (facts based vs. feelings based thinking). Our nature is caught between the two, inclining toward the latter, doing what we are told to do and trying, at the same time, to get some pleasure out of it (which sometimes gets us into trouble). Putting on the whole armour of God means that we are to stand "having done all," to keep standing (enduring), not running after pleasure when we are tempted by it or running away from pain when we are inflicted by it. We are to be a people who are "non-influenceable of private convictions" whenever everyone else is running after pleasure and running from pain, i.e. influenced by the stimulus-response nature of the world.
That being said I want to address the issue of "health care." When government, which directly ties itself to the collection and use of money gets involved in your heath, under the banner of "We care about you," can it really "care?" A few quotations first (by those of dialectic 'reasoning,' i.e. democratic ethics) to put things into perspective.
"The ethical issue is: How much can society spend, if it has limited resources, on keeping some person of age 65 alive for ten years at a cost that would cover the health services to children for perhaps 20 or 30 times that many children?" (Ralph Tyler, An Interview with Ralph Tyler Conducted by: Jeri Ridings Nowakowski, Ed.D. November 1981).
"I could well imagine a world of a reversed order, opposite to ours, in which ethical suicide of people after 30 or 35 as a religious technique or countering overpopulation is just as natural as birth control has become in our culture. In that society the love of life would be carried to its extreme. 'Make space for the unborn, make space for the newborn, for everyone born, Every time a new baby is born make space for him by taking the life of an old man or an old woman." (J. L. Moreno Who Shall Survive?)
These would be just some comments by socialist extremist of the past if it was not for the fact that most of those in government today are influenced and guided by this kind of thinking. Tyler, in his lifetime personally advised (influenced) over 6 of our Presidents regarding his socialist view of education (which directly ties to social health). Bloom's Taxonomy, book number 1, which all certified teachers must learn to apply in the classroom and accredited school must be established upon, is dedicated to him. The second quotation above being from the man who developed "role playing," a procedure which all federal agents and teachers must participate in for the 'purpose' of learning how to be "adaptable to 'change.'" Curriculum change (paradigm 'shift') in the education system is all about developing a people ("citizens") who see those of the "old" school as the enemy of society. "It must develop persons who see non-influenceability of private convictions in joint deliberations as a vice rather than a virtue." (Kenneth Benne, Human Relations in Curriculum Change). "Freedom of the conscience" and 'liberty' are sacrificed upon the alter of 'change.'
"Health care" by the government might sound good when it has the (your children's) money in good supply (remember that debt is your children's money, not yours). But when the money runs out or runs short, democratic ideology, such as that expressed above, kicks in. When the children see the money that is being spent to "keep you healthy," cutting into their stored up drug money, i.e. their money for pleasure, and they have your life in their hands (the "old" school, believing that life is sacred no matter what it costs, no longer being around or having any power), they will, for the sake of "survival" (for the future of social 'change,' i.e. for the pleasure and "enjoyment" of "all" of society), pull the plug. Welcome to our "new" form of Government (the "old" going out, the "new" coming into full actualization) called "health care," where the value or worth of life is not established upon inalienable rights, in God the Father's hands, but upon "human rights," in the children's hands. When the children (even those in adult bodies) rule, the people are oppressed. "And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them. And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour: the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable." "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:4-5, 12
You can't say that God hasn't warned us. But, like a person on a drug, the pleasures of this life (and the promises of the future to have more) have blinded us to the truth. It is not that we are to seek after pain. It is that pleasure, in and of itself, is not good. Only God is good. Reject Him and all you have is the pursuit of pleasure, i.e. the 'liberation' of "human nature" from the righteousness (restraints) of God, as the 'purpose' of life, which leads a people not only to oppression but also to abomination (which oppresses the righteous, i.e. "the people" persecuting those made righteous in Christ who keep reminding them of their sin and God's judgment upon them that they might 'repent,' be 'redeemed' by the only begotten Son of God, 'reconciled' to His Heavenly Father becoming lovers of God rather than lovers of pleasure).
© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2012-2015