During the forensics team’s health care exhibition debate on Nov. 3, I felt that little time was used to rebut the notion that the rights to “life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness” imply a right to health care. I argue that they don’t. If we are all created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights, then we all have equal rights, present always in all places that cannot be taken away by anyone else.
A right justifies forcing others not to infringe on it. Our right to life, for example, is a right to sustain our life through our efforts, and force can be used to prevent others from stopping or harming us. On the contrary, the “right” to health care is talked about as a right to services from medical professionals merely because we need them. By that logic, the right to life is an obligation on others to feed, clothe and house us, or be our bodyguard, then using force is justified to make others do so. Then, they have no say in their life and no right to pursue their own happiness. This would not be equal rights by any stretch. I think everyone should have access to health care, but it is not a “right.”
I often ask this question, “If the only way to get enough people in the medical profession was to have a draft, would you support doing that?” If you say no, then health care cannot be an inalienable right.
[email protected]
Health care is not an inalienable right
Daily Emerald
November 4, 2009
More to Discover