Healthcare. A Right or A Commodity?

By Sterling Smith

Before assuming universal healthcare will solve the healthcare crisis, it is vital to account for possible negative side effects, both logistically and morally.

As the baby boomer generation ages, the need for elderly care will increase exponentially. The demand for care in an industry that is almost 100% paid for by Medicare and Medicaid will leave our generation with a massive bill to pay. The proposed single payer solutions sound simple and enticing, however, there are deeper morals at play and the solution may not be as clear as we think it to be.

"Emma Woodhouse, handsome, clever, and rich"

At the crossroads of the Enlightenment and Romanticism, Jane Austen writes her novel, Emma, filled with ordinary people, places and events, unlike other novels of the time.  This was the time in history when reading novels became one of the main forms of entertainment for many people, but especially the middle class. This highlights an idea of the Enlightenment regarding literacy and the popular press where individuals gained access to learning for themselves on a personal level.  Of course, many new works were too expensive to buy, but around this time period, methods for sharing and borrowing the latest fiction came about including libraries, reading clubs, and subscriptions.  These methods are all still alive in our day as we see the sharing of literary works.  

It's Time to Vote

We live in a politically charged time where many feel they are not represented by our leaders. They feel that there is a disconnect between our values and the values of those in charge. John Locke said, "Men being... by nature all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this condition and subjected to the political power of another without his own consent." We, as humans, have natural rights such as freedom, equality, and independence. In a society we often give up some of these rights so that we can live with safety, stability, and order. We give up part of our rights in a hope that our society will benefit us and reflect our beliefs. By living in a society we choose to be governed by it. While we live here we choose to be governed by our leaders. Now this becomes a problem when our leaders do not represent us and our beliefs. We may feel that too many of our rights are being taken.

John Locke goes on to say, "When any number of men have so consented to make one community or government, they are thereby incorporated and make on body politic wherein the majority have a right to act and govern the rest." If we as a people are disenfranchised with our leadership we have a right and obligation to act. In our case this means to vote. The majority governs the society, and if a majority want a change, they can achieve it. John Locke believed that there was power in people, and I believe that too. We may be terrified by the state of our country, but unless we do something, we just allow it to govern us. By taking a stand and voting one can make a difference and begins to take more of his rights back into his own hands and make a change in the way society is governed. People choose to be governed, and can also choose how they are governed. Let's all choose how we are governed and vote for something better.

There is something in the water...

I wanted to focus on the actual meaning and origin of the word “Leviathan” (mostly because I think ancient, mysterious, biblical sea monsters are fascinating –and Disney mentioned it briefly in the second Atlantis movie and that is enough reason for me to spend time discussing it.) Using the imagery of a ferocious and powerful sea monster was an interesting choice for Hobbes, especially since the Leviathan has several different roles in the Bible (and in Disney films).

In the Hebrew Bible of the Book of Job, God describes the Leviathan to Job as a mighty beast who cannot be controlled, caged, or destroyed by the strength of men; only God can control this sea monster (refer to picture) and therefore Job is to have more faith in God’s power of creation and His control over the earth. Most likely, this is the form of the Leviathan that Hobbes was referring to.

However, if we jump to the book of Isaiah, God describes the Leviathan as a symbol of wickedness and specifically, wicked kings, and that if the people of God have faith in Him, this type of wickedness (A.K.A the strength of the Leviathan) cannot succeed.

And then in the second installment of Disney’s Atlantis (this is one of my favorite movie series so of course I’m going to talk about it) the Leviathan acts as a type of “hive mind” where it takes complete control of the population of a nearby village and makes them do whatever it wants, even if they commit evil.

So with these three forms of the Leviathan in mind and what they represent in a commonwealth, I definitely doubt more the social contract theory of Hobbes. Thanks to the Bible and Disney, I more strongly support the theory that man is good and therefore can govern him/herself with the need for a controlling sovereign. 

Image Credit: "Destruction of the Leviathan by Gustave Doré" (Public Domain Image via WikiCommons)

Ladies & Locke

As I looked over the talks given this weekend at General Conference, the broadcast given by the leaders of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints for their members, I was perturbed. Out of twenty-six talks given that weekend, one was from a woman. I think we need to hear from women more often in the church; diverse perspectives will only strengthen it. We have come far from the days when women were expected to live to cook, clean, raise children, and look nice, but we still have a way to go before they are valued equally to men.

Locke believed women were fully rational, and had
particularly high praises for Damaris Cudworth Masham.

John Locke was actually an early supporter of semi-feminist ideas. He even used religion and scriptures to support his claims in his Two Treatises on Government. In his efforts to establish that monarchies did not have a divine right to rule, he ended up claiming that this extended to the "right" of dominion God supposedly gave to Adam over Eve. 

Locke claims that God punished Eve for disobeying him, but that he did not give the authority of a monarch to Adam as the Enlightenment monarchs often claimed. This meant that women did not owe their husbands obedience, and that their children owed equal subordination to both parents, not just the father. Locke believed that men only had power over women in their physical superiority—which was actually pretty progressive for his time.