The Fundamental Difference Between Car Insurance and Health Insurance

One of the most frequent claims that I hear in favor of mandated health insurance goes as follows: “Hey! Where’s the uproar over car insurance, huh? Car insurance and health insurance are the same thing and if the state can force you to buy insurance for your car then it can force you to buy insurance for your health. After all, isn’t your health more valuable than your car, anyway? Isn’t getting health insurance the responsible thing to do?”

As a matter of fact, no, car insurance and health insurance are not the same thing at all. The difference is that the car insurance you are required to carry is liability insurance in case you hurt someone else. If you voluntarily choose to drive around in a two-ton vehicle at 70mph then you’d better be prepared and able to pay for the damages that you risk imposing on others every time you step into your vehicle. You have a moral obligation, a social responsibility to do so. Driving that massive hunk of metal at high speeds, often mere feet from pedestrians, is not a right; it is a privilege and a big responsibility.

Health insurance is for yourself. It does not cover other people if they catch your cold because you practice poor personal hygiene. It is a personal service that has to do with personal and even familial responsibility, certainly, but nothing to do with social responsibility. Only in a socialist state does your personal health become a “social responsibility” and a “burden” on everyone else who must cover you in the all-inclusive welfare state. That’s been tried and collective responsibility for personal health issues has led to rationing of healthcare, triaging for non-emergency situations, waiting periods lasting years with the patients dying or being permanently crippled before they could get care and, ultimately, death panels meant to snuff out the “burdensome” ones.

But you have a right to your life and you cannot ethically be forced to buy a service by the government simply on the basis that you’re alive and not dead. Taxing someone for what is rightfully theirs is an usurpation of that right that states: “you don’t really own that. The government does and we’re just lending it to you.” And if you don’t give the government their pound of flesh simply for letting you live then you’ll just have to be punished and if you’re poor and elderly, well, the state knows how to handle societal “burdens” like you.

That is the reality of mandated health insurance.

If you don’t want to have insurance on your car, get rid of your car, the flip side of that is if you don’t want health insurance what do you do? Driving a car in this country is not a right, but living free is.


Give Up Your Religion or Give Up Your Business

Now that the Supreme Court has upheld Obamacare and its mandate that employers buy health insurance that include coverage of contraception, abortifacients and sterilization many Catholics, who recognize birth control as morally reprehensible, have been put in a position where they must choose between practicing their faith or running their business. Such is the case for the Newland family.

( – The Justice Department last week presented the Newland family of Colorado–who own Hercules Industries, a heating, ventilation and air-conditioning business–with what amounted to an ultimatum: Give up your religion or your business.

“Hercules Industries has ‘made no showing of a religious belief which requires that [it] engage in the [HVAC] business,” the Justice Department said in a formal filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado.

In response to the Justice Department’s argument that the Newlands can either give up practicing their religion or give up owning their business, the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is representing the family, said in a reply brief: “[T]o the extent the government is arguing that its mandate does not really burden the Newlands because they are free to abandon their jobs, their livelihoods, and their property so that others can take over Hercules and comply, this expulsion from business would be an extreme form of government burden.”

The Newland family’s refusal to comply with the birth control mandate means that they will be forced to pay $26,500 per day and $9,672,500 a year simply for practicing their faith and refusing to buy products they find morally wrong and that aren’t even related to healthcare. The CNS article continues:

The Justice Department further argued that people owning for-profit secular businesses do not have a First Amendment right to the free exercise religion in the way they conduct their businesses—particularly if their business is incorporated.

In its brief responding to the Justice Department on behalf of the Newland family, the Alliance Defending Freedom forcefully rebutted the claim that the First Amendment does not apply to corporations let alone to family-owned businesses.

“The government argues that the Newlands forfeited their right to religious liberty as soon as they endeavored to earn their living by running a corporation,” said the Newlands’ brief.

“Nothing in the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s decisions, or federal law requires—or even suggests—that families forfeit their religious liberty protection when they try to earn a living, such as by operating a corporate business,” they argued.

I’ve had several people try to kindly explain to me that this in no way violates the Newland’s rights because their religion does not compel them to run a business and that the birth control mandate does not “force” them to violate their religion because they can simply give up their business. So, as Americans we’re entitled to either a right to freedom of religion or a right to property but not both, now? I guess imprisoning the Newland family for practicing their faith wouldn’t violate their religious rights either. If they can simply pay ten million dollars a year or give up their livelihoods entirely then they can just as simply walk into a prison cell. If the Department of Justice does not view an ultimatum forcing someone to choose between their faith and their business (read: how people make a living and put food on the table and a roof over their heads) as a “burden” then I doubt that they would view being incarcerated in a comfy cell with three meals a day as particularly burdensome either.

I believe that the birth control mandate and Obamacare do violate our rights but even if you think that this mandate is perfectly consistent with our constitution and laws the fact is that Obama’s healthcare scheme requiring individuals to purchase a product that they don’t want and penalizing them out of existence if they do not comply is classic corporate fascism. Obamacare is nothing more than big government and big business working hand-in-hand against the citizenry, where government forces the people to purchase things from businesses whether they want it or not. If Obamacare is constitutional then our constitution embraces a corporate fascist regime. Of course, anyone who’s ever actually read our founders knows that this is not what they intended. In fact, this is the very kind of totalitarian state that they meant to protect us from.

If you’re not convinced that we live in a progressively fascist state then consider the following: Our president has given himself the power to indefinitely detain any American citizen via the NDAA bill and, while that power has been deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge, a bill has been proposed, the Enemy Expatriation Act, which would render such a ruling irrelevant by granting the authority to strip any American of his citizenship on the same subjective and shaky grounds that the NDAA operates by; we also now have Predator drones flying over North Dakota; and our police force has been systematically militarized across the nation.

I’m a Franciscan Graduate and I Stand with my Alma Mater Against Obamacare

My undergraduate career has ended and I now have my Bachelor’s of Science in Nursing. I’ll have some more time to commit to this blog now, at least until late June at which point I’ll be flying up to Alaska for summer work.

In addition to graduating this past week, my now Alma mater announced that they will be dropping their health coverage for students because, due to Obamacare, such coverage will now be mandated to cover birth control in violation of Catholic conscience and will also cause the costs of student health insurance to triple.

Mike Hernon, the school’s vice president of advancement, stated, “This is putting people in a position where they are having to choose between their faith and their morality, and now an unjust cost, these sorts of regulations from the government are forcing our hand in a way that’s really wrong.”

Hernon also told Fox News on Wednesday that the changes represented a “moral and economic injustice.”

While the left condemns the move as extreme, citing ad nauseum that 98% of Catholic women use contraception I stand with Franciscan University as does the overwhelming majority of its student body, men and women both. Because, as Mike Hernon put it, just because everyone might say that something is okay doesn’t make it morally acceptable.