Skip to content

Why the Filipino Free-FARTERS Would Love Universal Health Care?

March 23, 2010
The Filipino politicians, including the religionists and the Free-FARTERS, would love a pinoy version of universal health care reform.

The Filipino politicians, including the religionists and the Free-FARTERS, would love a pinoy version of universal health care reform.

Socialism came to America when the Americans voted for Pres. Barack Obama. It doesn’t take a genius to detect whether a politician stinks of socialism or fascism. One only needs to embrace reason for him to understand the main scheme behind a nebulous government agenda or program. But reason, which is man’s only means of grasping reality and of acquiring knowledge, cannot not invade men. Rationality is a choice.

The so-called “victory” of the Obama regime is simply appalling. It took millions of dollars of payoffs, institutionalized brainwashing and wholesale lies and dishonest agenda before the Democrats managed to pass the highly contentious multi-billion dollar health care bill. The Obama Care was passed amidst protests, and it was clear that nobody took to the streets in order to voice out their support to the President’s socialist project. Yes, there was fanfare, but it was only short-lived. But what is clear is that this fight to kill the bill is far from over.

When a government promises pro-poor, next-to-impossible and idealistic programs, always have a second thought. All pro-poor and idealistic government agendas are a form of redistributive policy. In principle, a universal health care reform is a tyrannical, non-objective legal mechanism designed to steal money from those who produce and redistribute it to those who don’t. When a government proposes to implement this kind of altruistic scheme, the primary question is: Where will the government get the money or wealth? Who will be forced/coerced by law to produce wealth and who will be its beneficiaries?

Every individual who loves his life, liberty and happiness must be very interested in politics. History tells us that many collectivist/statist regimes in the past century screwed their own people. In Nazi Germany the Germans elected their own destroyer, and this makes them responsible for their own government and guilty for their inaction and stupidity. Even if the commissars and the tyrants of the defunct USSR were not elected to power, the Russians were guilty morally and the millions who died of hunger and of government persecution and execution deserved their fate because of their inaction and passivity. Politics is a big domain of ideas where an elected or selected few implement edicts, programs, reforms, and legal mechanisms that have a significantly impact on the life, liberty, rights and future of the inhabitants living in a given territory.

When it comes to politics, reason cannot invade those who reject or misinterpret it. In politics, reason is not automatically on the side of the atheists or agnostics who do not have the right to claim that those who believe in a deity or any form of supernatural being are all irrational. Those who misinterpret or hide behind the guise of reason stand on the same ground with the religionists whom they passionately denounce. In fact, those who push for and support irrational government programs like the universal health care are mostly atheists, particularly the New Atheists. When it comes to altruistic/statist government programs, faith is no longer an issue.

If there’s one issue that unites the New Atheists and the religionists, it’s the universal health care reform. In some other forums, there are the New Atheists who passionately criticize religions for their faith-based beliefs. On the other hand, the religionists fight back by claiming that the atheistic regimes of the past century were guiltier for killing millions of people. But here is an issue- the universal health care reform- that can bind New Atheists and religionists together. This scenario is not surprising, as both the New Atheists and the religionists hold the same code of ethics or morality: altruism. This morality holds than man is a sacrificial animal and that to be moral, he must put the interest of others above his own.

Logic tells us that man cannot choose his own destruction. But there are men, both atheists and religionists, who are unwittingly working on their own destruction. The New Atheists cannot claim they are an advocate of reason if, by their actions, they support destructive government programs like reproductive health care bill and universal health care reform. But how can they mount an informed opposition if their government tells them that it is pushing for a program that benefits the poor, the needy and the oppressed women? Reason is man’s only faculty to detect deception and lies.

In the realm of philosophy, there are two branches that cannot contradict each other if man is to survive: epistemology and ethics. Epistemology is a science devoted to the discovery of the proper methods of acquiring and validating knowledge, while ethics is a code of values to guide man’s choices and actions—the choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of his life. Between the two, it is man’s understanding of ethics that can make him rational or irrational.

A man who believes that he owns his life- that he must focus only on his rational self-interest- is the man of reason. A man of reason is the man of self-esteem. An esteemed individual believes that his mind is competent to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: is worthy of living. A rational human being holds that he is an end in himself and not the means to the ends of others.

On the other hand, an irrational man, which can be an atheist or a religionist, holds that his life is the means to the ends of others. He embraces altruism as his code of morality, which is shared by both the New Atheist and the religionist. He believes that sacrifices are necessary. He is the pragmatic man who takes that statist credo: “the end justifies the means.”

If the social system being fought by the New Atheist who embraces the morality of altruism is either socialism or fascism, the social system that is being prayed for by the religionist is theocracy. Socialism, fascism and theocracy are all distinct forms of collectivism, which means the subjugation of the individual to a group.

There’s a group of atheists in the Philippines, which I call the Filipino Free-FARTERS, who strongly support altruistic/socialist programs like the Reproductive Health bill. The passionate resistance of the religionists to this bill is understandable since they believed this legislation legalizes abortion and contravenes their religious dogma. I oppose this bill but I don’t share the sentiment and innuendos of the religionists. I oppose this bill on the ground that it violates individual rights and it is not the duty of the government to redistribute wealth. Because of this I had to start  a group whose advocacy and purpose is distinct from those of the religionists.

However, I predict that both the New Atheists and the religionist would agree on the programs and purpose of a universal health care reform. The religionists might have some problems on some issues that concern “procreation” but still they would support such a proposal.

Indeed, if religion is the opiate of the people, Karl Marx’s communism is the bromide of the stupid brutes. And if the religionists worship a deity or any unknowable entity, the New Atheists idolize the state or any tyrant who would promise them the “common good.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: