Obamacare — the mechanics of how it is evil, un-American and unconstitutional

Evil is a powerful word as used in the context of this essay, so, per Voltaire's famous "If you would converse with me, you must first define your terms" admonition, I will explain my definition of evil. But first, a small digression.

Culture's dividers, demonizers and destroyers are fond of using language to create imaginary political dichotomies, such as "secular" vs. "religious", "theist" vs. "atheist", "liberal" vs. "conservative", "communism" vs. "capitalism", "left" vs. "right", etc. Let me demonstrate the obfuscatory and intellectually useless nature of such deceptive garbage by proving that atheism itself is in fact a religion.

"World view" = how you believe the cause-and-effect material universe around us actually functions. "Atheism" = "world view". "Religion" = "world view". I submit that if a = c and b = c, logic dictates that a = b. When you look at it that way, all the wannabe-clever little talking points, jingoistic slogans and dogmas of the "atheism vs. religion" faux controversy are distilled down to the substantive essences of two competing world views or hypotheses. In other words, do you believe the Earth is round or flat, and what, precisely, is your empirically observable factual evidence which supports your opinion?

In defining the word "evil", I would say that "evil" and "sin" are directly synonymous, with "sin" being commonly believed to be a "religious" word, and "evil" capable of being both "religious" and "secular". For example, most atheists would readily agree that Adolf Hitler was guilty of "evil" behavior, which would fairly infer that "evil" can be a "secular" word even though it is found throughout "religious" literature.

To cut right to nub of the issue, I define "good" as anything (including behavior) which militates/gravitates in favor of individual self-ownership and self-determination. I define "evil" as anything (including behavior) which militates/gravitates against individual self-ownership and self-determination. Basically, good and evil are defined by the so-called "Golden Rule". Anarcho-atheists such as Stephan Molyneux prefer to call that exact same "religious" rule/tenet the "nonaggression principle", even though the substance of the two versions is, from a pragmatic point of view, identical.

The mechanics of good and evil work as follows: Whenever you aggressively pursue perpetrating evil, whether it is first degree murder or shoplifting a candy bar, your aggression deserves to be met with whatever level of defense is necessary to deter, and put a stop to, the aggression, up to, and including, the death of the aggressor. Sin is sin. Good and evil are good and evil. Aggression and defense are aggression and defense. The severity of the degree of evil has nothing to do with the way the spiritual mechanics of good and evil function.

In "religious" language, "the wages of sin is death." In "secular" language, we are not punished FOR our sins, we suffer FROM (aka "are punished BY") the natural cause-and-effect consequences of our anti-self-ownership, anti-self-determination behavior. If you wish to be truly free, you have no choice but to obey the rules of self-ownership and self-determination which have always been summarized as the Golden Rule, or the nonaggression principle. Do not do unto others that which you would not want done to you by others. Easy to understand, but difficult for wannabe-clever cutesy pies — who are always looking for ways to get around the rules — to obey.

Before proceeding to the subject of Obamacare, I should say that if the reader isn't familiar with the evils inherent in dishonest money, that is, in fluctuating mediums of exchange, in fraudulent political-manipulation-based debt-as-money vs. commodity money, it will be all but impossible to comprehend the full extent of the evil that is Obamacare. Accordingly, I suggest reading one or two of the essays I have written on the subject of money. I also strongly recommend watching Canadian artist Paul Grignon's superb animated videos "Money As Debt" and "Money As Debt II".

A 5-4 majority of the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Obamacare (the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) in a decision known as National Federation of Independent Business, et al. vs. Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, et al., No. 11–393 — Argued March 26, 27, 28, 2012 — Decided June 28, 2012. Author/lawyer Mark Levin characterized the decision is "a brutal assault on individual sovereignty" (aka self-ownership, self-determination). I view any attack on self-ownership and self-determination as evil by definition.

In an article titled, "Online symposium: The Bar Review version of NFIB v. Sebelius" at the SCOTUS Blog, law professor David Kopel wrote, "If recent media reports are true, then the second — (Kopel had already mentioned as the "first" Justice Roberts" Justice Owen Roberts who wrote the decision in United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 56 S. Ct. 312, 80 L. Ed. 477 [1936] ) — Justice [John] Roberts is the Justice who really did abandon what he considered to be a correct interpretation of the law, submitting to the threats of a President who attempted (this time successfully) to coerce the Supreme Court of the United States."

As a non-lawyer citizen blogger, I don't have to be as polite as David Kopel. Chief Justice John Roberts is often characterized as being on the so-called "conservative" wing of the Supremes. When you read his Obamacare decision, it is impossible to logically view him that way. He spends several of the first pages of his decision explaining how the law says he can't do exactly that which he winds up doing. As a result, the decision is certainly shamanistic, and arguably incoherent. Personally, I consider the decision a manipulative revisionist-history lie that rises to the level of treason. The decision is a prototypical example of why rogue out-of-control judges must be reigned back inside the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution with a judicial reform amendment.

As I have said elsewhere on this website, there have been numerous occasions where various Supreme Court majorities have ignored the U.S. Constitution, but this is the first time it has gone so far as ruling that the federal government, under a pretense of a constitutionally valid "individual mandate", can force a citizen against his will to buy a product from a privately owned business. As author/lawyer Mark Levin (who also characterized the decision as "absolutely lawless") said in effect, John Roberts' bottom line is that "you can't regulate inactivity, but you can tax it." Surely the Founders must be spinning in their graves!

RECENT VIDEOS, BLOGS, ARTICLES, COLUMNS, AND STATEMENTS:

SHAMELESS SELF-PROMOTION: See John's Twitter for one of the web's most eclectic mashups of interesting real-time news articles. I surf the web for interesting real-time news stories and informative tidbits so you don't have to.

Administration fears part of health care system so flawed it could bankrupt insurance companies, by Jim Angle - FoxNews Politics

Is Barack Obama an imperial president?, by Linda Feldman - Christian Science Monitor

Mark Levin On ObamaCare Decision: "Absolutely Lawless", Real Clear Politics Video - "Just because five lawyers in black robes, one of whom was purported to be a conservative, a man I knew a long time ago, issue a decision of the sort that they issued doesn't make it proper. As a matter of fact, this decision I would go as far to say is lawless. Absolutely lawless. That's why people are stunned."

Obamacare Will Increase Health Spending By $7,450 For A Typical Family of Four - Forbes

Lower Health Insurance Premiums to Come at Cost of Fewer Choices - New York Times

Why ObamaCare is Wrong for America: How the New Health Care Law Drives Up Costs, Puts Government in Charge of Your Decisions, and Threatens Your Constitutional Rights, by Grace-Marie Turner, James C. Capretta, Thomas P. Miller & Robert E. Moffit

The Obamacare Disaster, by Peter Farrara - Heartland Institute

A Less-Than-Rigorous ObamaCare Fact Check, by Michael F. Cannon - Cato Institute

Sebelius and the Election, by Eric R. Claeys - National Review Online

Obamacare Failed to Win Over Critics Because the Era of Big Ideas Is Over - Daily Beast

The New and Even Worse Obamacare - National Review Online

EDITORIAL: The Civil War of 2016 - U.S. military officers are told to plan to fight Americans - Washington Times

Doctor Critiques Obamacare - YouTube video - To see a more extended version with Greta VanSusterin conducting the interview, CLICK HERE

How to Reduce Healthcare Costs by 80% Overnight (Without Spending $2 Trillion) - YouTube video about Dr. Mary J. Ruwart's libertarian ideas on how to reduce health care costs


(NOTE: The full interview with Dr. Ruwart on Freedom Watch with Judge Andrew Napolitano runs from 7:15 on Part 4 to 7:44 of Part 5 of the "Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more" videos posted below. Specifically, the snippet of the interview used by Shelly Roche above runs from 9:00 to 9:43 on Part 4.)

Dr. Joel Wallach: You Can Prevent Disease - iHealthTube video


Part 1: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more - Judge Andrew Napolitano expounds on the 1st Amendment freedoms of thought and speech.

Part 2: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more

Part 3: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more

Part 4: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more

Part 5: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more

Part 6: Freedom Watch 21 w/ Ron Paul, John McManus, Mary Ruwart, David Bruckner, more

Judge Napolitano: Why Taxation is Theft, Abortion is Murder, & Gov't is Dangerous - YouTube video

Ad to protect American healthcare paid for by The League of American Voters. - YouTube video, with Dr. Mark J. Cuffe, M.D., Board-Certified Neurosurgeon

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine - YouTube video - "From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine. There is no video because this was an LP sent out by the American Medical Association" - Reagan is as good a talker as Obama! - JRW


Thomas Peterffy - Freedom To Succeed - YouTube video - A billionaire immigrant warns America against socialism.

Stop This Illegal Election: Save America - YouTube video

Pat Condell: Why You Can Not Vote Barack Hussein Obama For President 2012 - YouTube video

A word to rioting Muslims - YouTube video

Pat Condell: Islam Dismantled In 6 Minutes - YouTube video

Under construction . . .

FOOTNOTES:

ShareThis