Skip to main content

What? Yes Paul Ryan said that we have to repeal the Healthcare law because our rights come from Nature and God, not the government, as it states in our Declaration of Independence.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is arguing that President Barack Obama’s health care reform law should be repealed because rights come from “nature and God,” not the government.
Repeal and Replace with what, just Nature and God healthcare!

  video platform
  video management
  video solutions
  video player

We’re going to repeal the entire law and then we’re going to advance patient-centered reforms that address these kinds of issues,” the Wisconsin Republican said.

“I think this at the end of the day is a big philosophy difference,” he continued. “What Ms. Kennedy and others were saying is that this is a new government-granted right. We disagree with the notion that our rights come from government, that the government can now grant us and define our rights. Those are ours, they come from nature and God, according to the Declaration of Independence — a huge difference in philosophy.”

This is now a difference in philosophy and our rights come from nature and God according to Ryan.  So, can Ryan please explain in more detail who is going to grant our right to healthcare Nature or God since the government cannot grant our rights. Or am I misinterpreting what Paul Ryan is telling George
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (11+ / 0-)

    Seeking Awareness and Truth for all Americans

    by The Sheeping of America on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 10:41:52 AM PDT

  •  Which god is he referring to (6+ / 0-)

    and does he mean "Mother Nature"?  I would love to see some saavy reporter pin him down on the details of this statement, but since it involves a religious (sort of) statement, then the "don't question it" rule gets automatically applied.

  •  Certainly not the one he grew up believing in (6+ / 0-)

    especially since you can't serve Ayn Rand and the Catholic Church at the same time.

    Wait a minute.  Isn't what Ryan's saying what people were afraid JFK might say in 1960 because HE was Catholic too? I don't think I can deal with this much cognitive dissonance today.

    -7.75, -8.10; All it takes is security in your own civil rights to make you complacent.

    by Dave in Northridge on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 10:58:20 AM PDT

  •  He manages to forget the social contract (4+ / 0-)

    Rights come from nature/God but we can agree to contract socially as we did in the Constitution in order to better exercise our rights.

    •  I would agree with this partially. (0+ / 0-)

      However, for atheists, the statement about rights coming from either a god or "nature" (still unclear about what that means) is rather meaningless.

      •  It wasn't meaningless to the founders (0+ / 0-)

        You don't have to believe it but Enlightenment philosophers did.

        •  Not all of them.. (0+ / 0-)

          Jefferson and Adams discussed the views of atheist Enlightenment philosophers.  These included Diderot, D'Holbach and Hume.

          And certainly I would not put Paul Ryan in the ranks of Enlightenment philosophers- would you?

          This diary is about a modern day politician who, along with tons of other politicians, makes it a point to remind non-believers as often as possible that they have been left out of the franchise of democracy, both currently and historically.  It bothers me to see that kind of thinking supported.  One can certainly make the statement that our rights come from a deity, but that doesn't make it so, or make it unchallengable.

  •  If nature and God takes care of things, (7+ / 0-)

    then why the hell is Ryan collecting $174K per annum in Congress?

    Republicans: if they only had a heart.

    by leu2500 on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 11:09:57 AM PDT

    •  He can't help it if government forces him to take (2+ / 0-)

      that salary, but taking that big government provided health insurance plan and using the medical staff & services provided in the Congress building itself? Surely we tax payers already pay him enough so he can buy his own private plans for himself and his family fresh off his holy free market.  And just forget Ryan has already accessed big government Social Security benefits as a young man, perhaps even while reading Ayn Rand (who also happened to have writen his works of fiction while on Social Security disability himself).

      We need to remind Republicans they never really 'own' their bootstraps. They were given to them, they have always been plugged into an extended complex societal network where using them works. Society provides nearly everything to them, easy access to food, paved roads, bridges, and interstate highways on which they strode with their boots, flood control, building codes, made sure education and health services were available, provided police and fire protection along the way, and built public great schools and colleges that got many us into the 21st Century.  Even if they started their own business, it might not have been possible or have flourished in any other society than the nation still fully dependent upon our community's shared foundations. We've been losing traction with the best bootstraps lately as the economy is held hostage by Republicans, but we should be contesting them on their assumed ownership of their own bootstraps.  Somebody made those bootstraps, and these days, they're probably wearing bootstraps made by outsourced labor, in a country without a Constitutional democracy and lacking in common sense protections for labor and environment, and by the way, you'll have to rent or lease those bootstraps from a billionaire owned bank and corporation in the future. No more 'free bootstraps' for you!

      I'm not sure how making everyone struggle far more just to get by can possibly "make America great again." Telling the middle class they have to earn it all over again after the 1% steals all financial security away is beyond cruelty and makes the American Dream a hoax. But that does seem to be Paul Ryan's Vision for America.  It's his "You don't deserve to have it so good" mentality that ought to get him booted from office.  This 'policy' makes everyone but rich Republicans struggle more. In Ryan's world, asking the rich to make some sacrifices, for this nation--which made it possible for them to become rich, apparently is horrific robbery imposed by the poor unrepentant lazy rabble via 'big government', instead of being prudent common sense which promotes the common good of the nation itself.  Now Republicans like Ryan have turned Big Government upon us, with taxation now used to feed the corporate troughs of MIC & Wall Street & insurance, instead of used to provide for the true common good of citizens, and turning over our privacy and data to private corporations, and rolling back centuries of hard-won legal protections for workers and women.  Ryan's privatization push is turning big government, that had public accountability and fairness, and minimal overhead, into big corporations that only have to be fair to shareholders and financiers and are free to maximize profit to the point where the market can barely sustain it.

      When life gives you wingnuts, make wingnut butter!

      by antirove on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 01:07:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ayn Rand Didn't Believe In God.... (5+ / 0-)

    She must be rolling over in her grave.  Her little disciple, Paul Ryan, all of a sudden believes in God.

    Well.....isn't that special?  The church lady would approve of Ryan's comment but Ayn Rand sure wouldn't.

  •  It seems like Nature and God (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    would be FOR healthcare

    Seeking Awareness and Truth for all Americans

    by The Sheeping of America on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 11:23:23 AM PDT

    •  From the descriptions of the actions (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      historys mysteries

      of the Hebrew "God" in the Old Testament, I am not so sure of that. I guess this depends on which god you are talking about.   Also, if you mean by "nature" how the natural world works, then I do not recall any actions within nature that bend toward preserving damaged beings.  In fact, if we overpopulate, the nature of nature is to course correct through massive death.

  •  Just because the Declaration of Independence (3+ / 0-)

    says that

    all men ... are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
    doesn't mean that all rights are either unalienable (can't be sold) or come from "their Creator."

    A good Catholic like Paul Ryan must believe the Bible when it says that Esau sold his birthright to Jacob for a mess of pottage.  Genesis 25:30-34.

    And, of course, a few lines down from Ryan's quote, the Declaration of Independence says that governments are instituted to secure those "inalienable" rights.  So if healthcare insurance happens to be one of the "Creator endowed" rights, all that the ACA is doing is "securing" that right.

    It's not worth arguing to or about Ryan.  His mind and the minds of his acolytes are closed.

    We must drive the special interests out of politics.… There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will neither be a short not an easy task, but it can be done. -- Teddy Roosevelt

    by NoMoJoe on Sun Jul 01, 2012 at 11:24:11 AM PDT

  •  Paul Ryan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    Paul Ryan is a fool and that is the nicest thing I can say about him!

    The GOP "replace" policy: Die...

  •  among these (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Sheeping of America

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The implication is extremely clear that there are other rights, beyond “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. A right to healthcare could be considered either one of those, or (obviously) it could be considered a component of “Life”. Either way, Ryan's comment is either mealymouthed garbage or a flat-out lie.

    More importantly (and much has been written about this), it is very important to understand that the Colonists wanted to base their claim of independence on Lockean “Natural Law”, that they claimed was a higher law than the English Parliament; yet, the Southerners' insistence* on the protection of slavery, which of course contradicted Locke, made the wording very different. The original, pure, version, written by George Mason, is: “That all Men are born equally free and independant, and have certain inherent natural Rights, of which they can not by any Compact, deprive or divest their Posterity; among which are the Enjoyment of Life and Liberty, with the Means of acquiring and possessing Property, and pursueing and obtaining Happiness and Safety.” In that formulation, the rights were part of nature, and while God might have been involved, that was secondary. Jefferson's rewrite famously changed “born equal” to “created equal”, and, to avoid mentioning the anti-slavery natural law at all, used the phrase “endowed by their Creator” with no further specification. He also avoided “property”, which of course to the Southerners included slaves. Once the extremely dubious origins of Jefferson's wording is known, it frankly becomes difficult (for me at least) to treat it with much respect.

    *Of course, the departure from a pure formulation of natural law as the basis for independence was only one of the numerous adverse effects the slave-owners caused for the nation, but it was among the earliest ones.

    •  Just goes to show that (0+ / 0-)

      all of history is a compromise.  The Declaration of Independence was a petition of rights being made to a theocracy.  What better way to one-up your opponent than to claim that your arguments are endorsed by The Deity?  Once a portion of the men involved in the Declaration went on to write the Constitution, they dropped the theistic language.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site