The United States Supreme Court. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Yesterday the United States Supreme Court upheld ObamaCare, a massive intrusion into our personal lives and our freedoms. With this ruling, the courts granted congress the power to force Americans into purchasing products that they may or may not want or need. By the courts calling the individual mandate a tax, they have upheld the single largest tax increase in American history, created a bureaucracy that will grow the size of government like we have never seen and granted the IRS unprecedented powers to come after you and your money.
Every American should be scared, very scared indeed.
Think I am over reacting? Think again
- California Proposes Ban on Energy-Hogging HDTVs Starting in 2011
- New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks
- New York restaurant kitchens face threat of salt ban
- Michigan smoking ban still lights up debate
- School Soda Ban
- Chicago Public School Bans Home-Packed Lunches
Shall I go on?
- ‘Not it!’ More schools ban games at recess
- Norton schools ban bake sales
- School Bans Christmas Colors?
Are you starting to get it… Once government knows it can get away with one ban, one tax, one forced purchase, it will add more, take away more freedoms, more individual choices, creating a nanny state that feels they know better than you, how you should live your life.
All Americans should be scared, very scared indeed…
God Bless
Paul Sposite
An American Point of View 
I, too, find this increase frightening. I am not opposed to the idea of “gee, it would be lovely if everyone had health insurance” — it’s a very nice, very friendly thought. However, it doesn’t bear out in practice. Other countries have tried this and all have failed, bringing the quality of health care down and dramatically increasing cost and inefficiencies. I do not understand why people think we can do this better.
Moreover, the government ought not be able to force people to buy one thing over another (or to chose not to buy something), just like it ought not be able to tell us how to lead our personal lives and make our own moral decisions. I seem to recall a very big fight with the British Empire breaking out as a result of this kind of government dictates a few hundred years ago. Government, or at least government designed according to the principles of the US Constitution, exists to preserve border security and facilitate trade, and not much else. The concepts of right and wrong were not intended to be legislated. If we want to make the world a better place, the onus is on us to do so in our daily decisions — and not to pass off that personal responsibility onto a faceless government.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on MermaidsSinging and commented:
I, too, find this increase frightening. I am not opposed to the idea of “gee, it would be lovely if everyone had health insurance” — it’s a very nice, very friendly thought. However, it doesn’t bear out in practice. Other countries have tried this and all have failed, bringing the quality of health care down and dramatically increasing cost and inefficiencies. I do not understand why people think we can do this better.
Moreover, the government ought not be able to force people to buy one thing over another (or to chose not to buy something), just like it ought not be able to tell us how to lead our personal lives and make our own moral decisions. I seem to recall a very big fight with the British Empire breaking out as a result of this kind of government dictates a few hundred years ago. Government, or at least government designed according to the principles of the US Constitution, exists to preserve border security and facilitate trade, and not much else. The concepts of right and wrong were not intended to be legislated. If we want to make the world a better place, the onus is on us to do so in our daily decisions — and not to pass off that personal responsibility onto a faceless government.
LikeLike
The Supreme Court has upheld the individual mandate of Obamacare that requires all individuals to purchase health insurance or face penalties. This is beyond ludicrous. Never before has our government REQUIRED, under penalty of law, that citizens purchase a product.
LikeLike
The controlling opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, upheld the mandate as a tax, although concluded it was not valid as an exercise of Congress’ commerce clause power. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined in the outcome.
LikeLike
The most straightforward reading of the individual mandate is that it commands individuals to purchase insurance. But, for the reasons explained, the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power. It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power to “lay and collect Taxes.” Art. I, §8, cl. 1. In pressing its taxing power argument, the Government asks the Court to view the mandate as imposing a tax on those who do not buy that product. Because “every reasonable construction must be resorted to, in order to save a statute from unconstitutionality,” Hooper v. California, 155 U. S. 648, the question is whether it is “fairly possible” to interpret the mandate as imposing such a tax, Crowell v. Benson, 285 U. S. 22. Pp. 31–32.
LikeLike