Kearns and Sons RS Aesthetics

Support for Foss’ position


This is in response to Foss rationale deeply flawed. I take exception to almost every word you wrote. Not everyone who took advantage of Title 10 were poor, many could afford their own doctors and those who couldn’t could seek medical help elsewhere. Our local hospital just offered free medical services to women. The Pilgrims did come over for religious freedom and didn’t take Indian land as you claim, they coexisted and helped one another. Grabbing of Indian lands came later by the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
Religion is not a membership, it’s a relationship with our Savior Jesus and we freely choose to go to church. While there are unmoral people in every walk of life, just because you aren’t religious does not mean you have morals either. I have met plenty of not-religious people who would steal you blind so your point was useless.
We have no objection to helping others in need, but health care has never been a right nor the governments job. It is not in the Constitution and therefore they are stepping out of line.
So you know socialism is defined as a way of organizing a society in which industry are owned and controlled by government rather than individual people or companies. It is called Communism.
I can give horror stories how socialized medicine doesn’t work in other countries. A dear friend in England had to wait 3 years for an operation that would have only taken a month here to get done. People from Canada come here all the time to get better medical care. They are not always getting the best in those countries.
As for drugs, the medical industry aren’t telling the truth about the drugs, just look at the lawsuits on TV.
You said faithful and wise representation is the foundation of liberty in the Constitution. This is why the Constitution is called the SHALL NOT. Limiting government to what they can’t do. Our founding Fathers knew it unwise to let government rule over our lives including health care.
FYI We don’t live in a democracy, we live in a REPUBLIC look it up there is a vast difference.
You say Foss is being selective and not representing the public, did it ever occur to you there’s a lot of us who agree with her and don’t want government putting strings attached to health care.
Several years ago when liberals were getting their way with the last commissioners they wrote in the paper that we conservatives should not complain and abide by what our commissioners say after all we the people elected them. Now I will say it to you that should be enough said.
Dee Gibney


Editor’s Note: The above letter has not been edited.

2 Responses to Support for Foss’ position
  1. Howard
    October 28, 2013 | 10:00 pm

    The “strings attached” to the funding for the clinic are spelled out in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. Teenagers have a right to privacy regarding their healthcare.

    And the “health care” that the founding fathers had consisted of bloodletting, leaches, herbal potions and mercury injections to treat their syphilis. Thankfully things are a bit different now.

  2. Carlotta Grandstaff
    October 25, 2013 | 3:43 pm

    I laughed out loud when I read the editor’s note at the bottom of this mess of a letter: “The above letter has not been edited.” I imagine you probably tried to make sense of this tangled skein of words, but didn’t have an entire morning to devote to it. Thanks for the laugh!

Leave a Reply

Wanting to leave an <em>phasis on your comment?