Supreme Court rules that 'Obamacare' health insurance mandate is constitutional

Originally Posted by cobraman1

We are more socialist that you must believe. This country is headed on a downward path very very fast. If our founding fathers were here today, they would be ashamed at the things the government is doing. Obamacare is unconstitutional in so many ways. There is only the illusion of freedom in america these days. Its not just the reptile community that is being hurt, its the American people in general. Its not just the dem or rep, but both. I honestly believe the ONLY hope, politically, for America is Ron Paul. He is the only one that sticks with the constitution and wont turn this country into trash.

Okay, so give me the evidence of before this happened was the US a better place?

The founding fathers would be ashamed? Clearly, you do not know very much the founding fathers.

Are you christian by change? Don't you believe you should help people?

Originally Posted by AnyankasGeckos

Okay, so give me the evidence of before this happened was the US a better place?

The founding fathers would be ashamed? Clearly, you do not know very much the founding fathers.

Are you christian by change? Don't you believe you should help people?

Yes our founding fathers would be ashamed. Actually its clear you dont know very much about our founding fathers. If you did, you would understand that this country has has stomped on the constitution many times in history and its getting worse. Are you trying to say the country is better off now. You would have to be crazy to believe that. We are SO SO far in debt over stupid things that we can barely keep our heads above water. Tax, tax , tax is all they understand anymore. As to your question regarding my religion, Yes, I am of christian belief. NO, this is NOT helping people what so ever. It sounds good on paper, but it doesnt work and history proves this. People will give more if they arent already forced to give. Its not the federal Governments job to play the role as health insurance company. Not to mention, you will now be forced to have health insurance. What is free about that? If you dont want it, that is your business, but they have made that choice for you now. It all boils down the the government having WAY to much power and like every other world power in the history of the world, we will fall unless we stop this.

Cobraman, in what context would the Founding Fathers be ashamed? And which Founding Fathers? You do know there were quite a few with varying beliefs don't you? The right to levy taxes is in the Constitution, so if you want to make this a constitutional issue, it's clearly spelled out that the federal government is entitled to levy taxes. Common Law and Legislative Process determine what types of revenue and in what ways that the revenue will be collected, not the Constitution. You speak of the Constitution being stomped on, but the US Supreme Court, the highest court in the U.S., who's job is to determine what is or is not constitutional, doesn't agree with you. And just to let you know, the federal government isn't the health insurance provider, private corporations are. In the current system, your taxes go up because of people entering into the E.R without any coverage. For example, if someone enters into the E.R., has no health insurance, and has a heart attack, that person is legally entitled to be treated regardless of the money. When they are treated and can't pay for it, guess who does? You do! So to think your taxes are going to go up substantially if any is nonsense.

Also, I wouldn't reference history when you clearly don't know your history.

Originally Posted by Lestathim

Cobraman, in what context would the Founding Fathers be ashamed? And which Founding Fathers? You do know there were quite a few with varying beliefs don't you? The right to levy taxes is in the Constitution, so if you want to make this a constitutional issue, it's clearly spelled out that the federal government is entitled to levy taxes. Common Law and Legislative Process determine what types of revenue and in what ways that the revenue will be collected, not the Constitution. You speak of the Constitution being stomped on, but the US Supreme Court, the highest court in the U.S., who's job is to determine what is or is not constitutional, doesn't agree with you. And just to let you know, the federal government isn't the health insurance provider, private corporations are. In the current system, your taxes go up because of people entering into the E.R without any coverage. For example, if someone enters into the E.R., has no health insurance, and has a heart attack, that person is legally entitled to be treated regardless of the money. When they are treated and can't pay for it, guess who does? You do! So to think your taxes are going to go up substantially if any is nonsense.

Also, I wouldn't reference history when you clearly don't know your history.

You are correct, that the supreme court determines what is constitutional, but just because they say so doesnt not mean it really is or isnt. The supreme court even said that obamacare IS unconstitutional, but they cant just fine(tax) people with out health insurance instead of forcing you to have it. Basically they are forcing you through fines which, although worded differently, is the exact same thing as forcing you to have it. You are correct about the constitution allowing us to be taxed and some taxes are ok, but give me a break, we are taxed far to much and way more than was intended. The supreme court doesnt always follow the constitution like they are suppose to, just like cops dont always follow the laws they are suppose to uphold. For instance, Look at the patriot act. The supreme court approved that. I actually do know my history and although the founding fathers obviously didnt all have the exact same opinions on every subject, They were for small governments mainly run by state, Not by the federal government. And Yes the federal government will be its own insurance provider. Under obama care, if you can not afford health insurance,it will provide it for you.

Actually what the Supreme Court says is constitutional or unconstitutional does mean that it really is or isn't. If you're alluding to some deeper intrinsic value like just because they decide that doesn't mean it is, then perhaps you yourself are not a constitutionalist either. The Supreme Court did not say that it IS unconstitutional, they said that under Commerce Clause, forcing citizens to buy something is unconstitutional. However, under the principles of taxation, it is constitutional. In regards to your fines statement, any law passed that is not obeyed is punishable by something, fines, jail, etc. If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail. So if this is the law, and you break it, of course you're going to be punished. In regards to being taxed to much, that is an opinion that contains a substantial amount of variables and values, different to everyone because everyone pays different amounts. The Supreme Courts job is to interpret the Constitution, and if you see, the Constitution grants them that power. If you have a problem with their results, exercise your right to protest. Actually if you knew your history you would know that the founding fathers weren't just for small government, but large government as well. Federalism is a prime example of from top to bottom and bottom to top government. As a matter of fact, here are some proponents of larger government: Washington, Hamilton, and Adams just to name a few. On top of that, they actually wrote the Constitution in favor of large government because the original constitution,the Articles of Confederation published 10 years earlier, was a catastrophe. And no the Federal government will not be its own insurance provider. If you can't afford health insurance under the current system, you get put on Medicaid. This new system will be no different.

Originally Posted by Lestathim

Actually what the Supreme Court says is constitutional or unconstitutional does mean that it really is or isn't. If you're alluding to some deeper intrinsic value like just because they decide that doesn't mean it is, then perhaps you yourself are not a constitutionalist either. The Supreme Court did not say that it IS unconstitutional, they said that under Commerce Clause, forcing citizens to buy something is unconstitutional. However, under the principles of taxation, it is constitutional. In regards to your fines statement, any law passed that is not obeyed is punishable by something, fines, jail, etc. If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail. So if this is the law, and you break it, of course you're going to be punished. In regards to being taxed to much, that is an opinion that contains a substantial amount of variables and values, different to everyone because everyone pays different amounts. The Supreme Courts job is to interpret the Constitution, and if you see, the Constitution grants them that power. If you have a problem with their results, exercise your right to protest. Actually if you knew your history you would know that the founding fathers weren't just for small government, but large government as well. Federalism is a prime example of from top to bottom and bottom to top government. As a matter of fact, here are some proponents of larger government: Washington, Hamilton, and Adams just to name a few. On top of that, they actually wrote the Constitution in favor of large government because the original constitution,the Articles of Confederation published 10 years earlier, was a catastrophe. And no the Federal government will not be its own insurance provider. If you can't afford health insurance under the current system, you get put on Medicaid. This new system will be no different.

I disagree, our founding fathers didnt want big government. They wanted a federal government, to watch over the states, but not to have as much power as they do. The power was intended to fall upon the states and the states would govern themselves. The federal government is way bigger than was ever intended. And yes the federal government will be its own insurance provider, because that is exactly what medicaid is. Just because the supreme court declares it ok, doesnt mean it is. You are correct about protesting our rights and i most certainly have. I feel the way this country is going, we wont be around for long(as a power at least) because our government has run us into the ground. more taxes just to put us in more debt and a world that is getting more and more tired of us.

Insurance company's are still going to be here. There's so much people think is fact with the bill and it isn't.

Also, Ron Paul, I like a lot of his ideas how ever....

Bush had Republicans to help push things through
Obama has Democrats to push things through
Ron Paul would probably find a fight on both sides and his ideas dramatically watered down to get any thing done.

You can disagree all you want facts are facts. They wanted federal government to do much more than watch over states. The U.S. could have never been a world player if the federal government was just to loosely watch what the states were doing. A prime example of this is when separate states sent ambassadors to France and Napoleon bluntly told them that he wanted an ambassador from the United States, not Virginia, Mass, etc. More examples are that the government had no way to levy taxes, call on troops, enforce interstate commerce, and essentially deal with anything on a federal level. Over time the people recognized the importance or necessity of having government regulate certain aspects of their lives. Think about this, if it wasn't for regulation your kids would be playing with toys coated in lead paint from China. So to think that the founding fathers wouldn't agree with any of this let alone endorse it means they were either idiotic or ignorant. I'm not willing to accept that. They set the system up for us citizens to change it, modify it, and adapt to the social memes that came over time.

As for Obamacare, you stated that it was making the government an insurance provider. Even if that were the truth, which it's not, you just stated that Medicaid already makes the government an insurance provider. With that logic, your problem should be with the government itself, not with Obamacare.

Our government is in debt, most are. That doesn't have anything to do with power or us being around for long. The United State's military is over 10 years ahead of everyone else in the world, so traditional threats are non existent. The U.S. has the highest GDP. (Just food for thought, the only reason the U.S became the dominant economic power in the world was because they were the only free market economy standing after WWII. As the other markets caught up, Americas prosperity began to even out again.) So, if there's a reason the U.S. won't be around for long, it will be because it didn't take care of the health of it's own people, not because of over taxation and debt.

If you agree with getting rid of the Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Education, and Department of Energy by all means vote for Ron Paul. I for one think education is the most important issue in this country and for society; maybe because I'm in that field and understand it's value. If one thinks the best way to get the U.S. ahead of everyone else is to eliminate it's education system, they clearly have a serious lack of mental capacity.

The US got where it is because of the industrial age, cheap labor and plentiful resources.

The US resembles socialism more and more everyday.Why? because that is secretly what people want. They want the government to regulate things and make it all "safe" for them. You can't live in full protection and have true freedom at the same time.

Ron Paul's entire campaign is/was based on theories. It would never had flown and it would have destroyed the country. The entire logic behind complete removal of government funded advanced education system was just one of his many ideas that would have bit us all in the butt short order.


I'm not a fan of Obamacare. However, parts of the plan are similar to the RomneyCare from good ole Mitt. So if that's a deciding point for you in this election, guess what....you lose on both ends.

Our political process is not about voting for the best candidate anymore, its about voting for the lesser of the evils which is true sadness.