March 03, 2006
When the state is providing the medical care for a prisoner, then they most certainly have the right to adjust and control the "patients" to attempt to reduce medical costs.
Now one prison facility has chosen to expand that prohibition, banning smoking anywhere "on campus" -- including guards and other employees. They're selling this on the scientifically questionable, but publicly acceptable notion of "secondhand smoke." Don't you just love it when public facilities make public policy based on rumors? Expect lawsuits, but don't expect them to succeed.
Even more interesting is the process here. Note how quickly this passed through without any mention anywhere. And note exactly what's going on -- since the state is the one providing the medical services, they are within their right to attempt to restrict the activities of its patrons.
If the state provides medical services to you, or the public, then they will also be within their right to completely control your activities and lifestyle. Sure, the medical care might be "free" (to you), but only if you follow the rules. I can see this working for the socialist-style medicine that the Democrats so strongly support -- it's an easy way to completely control you so they like it.
Where could it lead? Simple -- make all medicine state-controlled as the Democrats would like. Then the state gets to decide who gets service and who doesn't. You're a smoker? They deny you any health care. You were caught speeding? Sorry, that's risky, no service for you. Hippocratic oath? Sorry, that's for the ancient Greeks, not state-sponsored health care.
Posted by: Ogre at
12:19 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: William Teach at March 03, 2006 01:27 PM (V5vwb)
Posted by: TF Stern at March 03, 2006 03:08 PM (dz3wA)
Posted by: Ogre at March 03, 2006 03:43 PM (/k+l4)
Posted by: prying1 at March 03, 2006 04:16 PM (i+dJo)
88 queries taking 0.1237 seconds, 193 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.