The Moral And Immoral Cases For ObamaCare

By: Tia Johnson 0 Comments   4/29/2014

"There are two sides to every argument, and they're usually married to each other." -Unknown author

I wouldn't agree with this quote in every argument, but regarding Obamacare, it seems to be true. People on both sides use morality as their argument, but their case for morality comes from polarizing angles.

"Obamacare" is the nickname for the national push mandating healthcare for everyone, and it certainly has its share of controversy. It's valid to point out that some people who need and want healthcare coverage can't get it. Should someone provide it for them? Isn't that what Jesus would do?

On the other side, if I'm mandated to obtain healthcare, doesn't that disrespect me as a person? How does this impact my freedom?

Isaiah 58:6-7 addresses God's desire- or command- to provide for the needy: "I want you to share your food with the hungry and to welcome poor wanderers into your homes. Give clothes to those who need them, and do not hide from relatives who need your help."

This commandment is convicting in a culture where leftover food is thrown in the garbage and relatives are paid by the government to care for the elderly. I must say that as a Christian, the decision whether or not to accept government aid is wide and varied. Each person must search out their conviction in this matter. 

Some who are paid by the government to care for an elderly or home-bound relative may consider it a great blessing and one of God's provisions. After all, they would care for them anyway. Others see it as immoral. There is not a clear-cut answer to this. Maybe a better question is this: should the government continue to provide these programs? Is it morally right for a government to offer financial assistance to those in need?

One thing we can note from Isaiah's passage above was its intention for individuals, not systems. Only a person can "welcome poor wanderers into your homes"- not an agency. But since many Christians have not embraced this commandment, an agency, and now many agencies, have been formed. Also, 2 Corinthians 9:7 admonishes us to not give reluctantly or under pressure, but generously and cheerfully. I'd say taxes are a rather reluctant form of giving. But then again, if all Christians would have embraced God's call to care for the poor, provision by taxes would not be needed. It seems that our lack of obedience has caused this dilemma, like how our sin nature has caused the need for an allowance of divorce in Scripture. Perhaps God allows for government aid as he allowed for divorce. I'm not sure, but I do know that I can't make a blanket statement regarding the mess that we're in.

Christian generosity is not the only factor here, though. Our "free for all" society also includes Christians and others who, regardless of need, will grab anything that is free. It's a form of hoarding wealth and gluttony- which is a sin. I'm sure for many it's not a question of whether they need the help, it's a question of whether they qualify. After all, more help from somewhere else means more of my money that I can keep. 

Perhaps the more urgent controversy over Obamacare, however, is not whether the government should or shouldn't help people, but how Obamacare stabs into religious freedom. Alliance Defending Freedom has been following this policy since its inception and has produced this fact sheet:  http://www.alliancedefendingfreedom.org/page/ObamaCare

In Obamacare, life-ending drugs (right now a.k.a. abortificants) are expected to be freely provided to employees at the expense of their employers. It demands that "life-ending drugs be provided free of charge by religious employers and religious people in businesses, while the cost of other life-saving care continues to cost you" (through taxes and copay charges). The irony of this is obvious. Why are abortificants protected so severely? Why do officials insist that life-inducing drugs be so accessible? Logic would have it that such "medical care" be under locknd-key. While most other medical approaches reach their hardest to save life, why make it so easy to end life?

ADF raised another point: "The real problem is that Obamacare denies access to religious freedom. No one is denied access to abortion pills; they just shouldn't force someone else to pay for them." This is a valid argument. Abortion is already legal and available. Why should it also be charged to employers?

Those employers who are fighting against these mandates have a difficult choice to make. If they lose, they'll face astronomical fines. However, the battle for their freedoms is important enough to take a stand. "The government has no business forcing citizens to choose between making a living and living free" ADF had stated, adding: "That's why when the conflict is between real freedoms named in the First Amendment and a fictional 'right' to have someone else pay for your abortion pills, freedom must win."

DelightMedia.com


Current Catalog

Reader Comments

Be the first to leave a comment!
Write a Comment

Please keep comments civil and on-topic. Abusive or inappropriate comments will be removed without warning.

 Name (required)   
 Email Address (required)   
 Website URL 
Comment  
Secular Sabotage: How Liberals Are Destroying Religion and Culture in America

William Donohue has been the president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights since 1993, which works to safeguard both the religious freedom and free speech in America. Christianity is clearly under attack, from many radical atheists, sexual libertarians, the media and others. What many of these groups don’t realize is that liberty and freedom are the source of our nation’s success and it is Christianity that protects liberty and freedom. Therefore their attacks against Christianity are self-destructive as they work to destroy the Christian culture of America that is the foundation of our freedom and economic prosperity.

Social Justice and the Christian Church

This is an illuminating book that throws down the gauntlet to those who wish to capture evangelical Christianity for causes that perpetuate poverty rather than eliminate poverty. Nash shows that the many ideas that are build on socialism result in worsening the conditions of the needy. Nash explains that true ‘social’ justice is found in true love for the needy, which is found in those that are willing to take a deeper look at what really works and what does not. The result is that many today that gather supporters to join their cause to help the poor are actually the reason the poor never escape a life of poverty. Read this book if you truly want to liberate people from poverty.

Saving Leonardo: A Call to Resist the Secular Assault on Mind, Morals, and Meaning

Is secularism a positive force in the modern world? Nancy Pearcey makes a compelling case that secularism is destructive and dehumanizing and if not confronted, will lead the world into hell on earth. The goal of this book is to equip you to detect, decipher, and defeat the monolithic secularism that is spreading rapidly and imposing its values on your family and hometown. As such, she calls Christians to abandon the "fortress mentality" that has been prominent for years; a mentality that gravitates to isolation from the world. Once again, the faith of Christians is needed to save the world.

Legislating Morality: Is it Wise? Is it Legal? Is it Possible?

Many Christians have foolishly bought into public school arguments about separation of church and state. This book goes back to all the court decisions which were made over the last 100 years which led to this common idea we hear today. The book clearly shows that Jefferson never intended separation of church and state the way it is being taken out of context today. Turek explains how these court decisions led to making secular humanism the default religion taught in public schools today.