As Bernie Sanders is out there campaigning for the nomination to become the Democrats’ 2020 Presidential candidate, he is repeatedly making the statement that “Health care is not a privilege, it is a right.”
He knows better and is intentionally playing semantics with people.
In the United States, our founding documents defines rights as they relate to the government. These are the unalienable rights, or natural rights, which do not rely on laws and are independent of culture.
These types of rights include things like a right to life, a right to privacy, a right to worship, a right to freely speak and express yourself, and the list goes on and on.
When you boil all these down, natural rights are basically the right to not to have the government and other people cause you harm or interfere with your life.
Bernie Sanders is conflating these natural rights with so-called legal rights, which the American system identifies as privileges or entitlements.
Legal rights are bestowed by the government, which means they can be modified, repealed, and limited by law. Are you with me so far?
An example of a legal right is driving an automobile. If you want to drive a car on public roads, you must conform to the law. You must meet minimum age limit, apply for a driver’s license, pass a test, have auto insurance, and you must follow all driving laws.
But it does not stop there. In most states, you can lose your right to drive a motor vehicle by violating a completely unrelated law, such as failing to pay court ordered child support.
Moreover, at any time it wants, the government can modify, repeal, or limit your driving privileges.
So, if the government passes a law stating that every person in the United States has a right to single-payer, government-funded health care, it can only be described as a privilege and an entitlement.
Socialists and Progressives are constantly pushing the idea that things like guaranteed health care, guaranteed employment, a guaranteed minimum income, guaranteed housing… are essential and basic rights, but they are not.
All these proposed guarantees are not free. Government cannot “give” anyone health care without first taking something away from someone else. There is no such thing as government money; there is only taxpayer money.
Is this making sense to you?
Essentially, this all comes down to the difference between a need and a right. Health care, a living wage, housing, and so on are basic needs that everyone has a right to pursue.
Your only true right is that the government cannot (or should not) infringe on your ability to pursue health care, pursue a living wage, pursue housing… but no one owes any of these things to you.
I would go so far as to say labeling legal privileges or entitlements as rights actually contradicts the very idea of rights because they forcibly impose obligations. Don’t you agree?
All that said, I want to be clear, I am not dismissing the importance of health care. What I am ultimately saying here is that there is nothing virtuous about spending other people’s money without their consent, no matter how well-intentioned.
Would you rob your neighbor to give to someone else that you believe is more in need? This is exactly what Bernie Sanders wants our government to do.
What do you think America?
Timothy Alexander 