Obamacare

 Ok, so I'm not a professional economist and this entry has a lot less to do with the specifics of the issue at hand, and a lot more to do with the general philosophy behind our sense of angst. But if I have something to contribute, these are my thoughts...

It seems like the main philosophical difference behind this polarizing issue is the question of whether healthcare is a basic human right or a privilege for anyone who is in need. The Hippocratic Oath, those in the medical field take, leans heavily toward the former of the two, which is why many of the down and out I come in contact with here in Downtown San Diego can still walk into a hospital and get basic care, regardless of their financial portfolio. The poor of other countries are not so fortunate, and in some cases are denied healthcare no matter the need.

It seems to me that this Hippocratic ideal is line with Christian thought, from what I read in Christian history in cities like Antioch, where Christians climbed the inner city walls that divided the people groups, and took care of the poor in each of the cities subsections. There are countless examples like this, emanating from the movement of the Holy Spirit upon the hard hearts of humanity and the Christ-centered theology that leads us to care and love and show mercy to those who don't deserve it, much in the same way that God had mercy upon us in Christ.

People affected by this same theology moved to the Americas in search of God (freedom of religion), glory and gold. The classic examples of the strife and difficult circumstances they faced shows up in the juxtaposition two of the earliest settlements: Jamestown & Plymouth. Plymouth faced many of the same difficult situations as Jamestown, but formed a more socialistic model to ride out the hard winters, taking care of one another's sick and hungry, and finally finding God's providence in a saving relationship with native Americans. Jamestown was not so fortunate, plagued with bitter conditions and men with poor character who cared more for the glory and gold than anything else. When it became apparent that neither glory nor gold were to be had, many of the men became listless, refusing to do work necessary to eat and provide for themselves. All hope seemed lost. Enter the ideal known as the Protestant Work Ethic, instated by John Smith as he proclaimed to this ragtag group of misfits, "If you don't work, you don't eat (paraphrased)." This ideal whipped the settlers into shape and saved what was on course to be a total disaster.

So we have two seemingly competing ideals, both emanating from Christian thought:

a) Everyone deserves basic human dignity and care

b) Only those who earn their way deserve dignity and care

As I see it, these two thoughts have evolved into our basic camps today (at the risk of oversimplifying): Liberal / Conservative, Democrat / Republican, Socialist / Capitalist. Are they really that opposed and incompatible? Is it a false dichotomy that seems to exist between them or are they in fact polar opposites? Is one more right than the other? How does the gospel speak into this?

In my way of thinking, both thoughts are heavily influenced by Christ and the gospel. Since both find their origin in him, aren't they also compatible? Aren't they meant to be integrated? Don't they function best together and not when they are posed against each other? Is Christ divided? Is our only option choosing a side and fighting with our brothers across the aisle?

This causes me to think outside our current political box... It makes me wonder what our political landscape would look like if more politicians and economists and dreamers began imagining an integrated platform, combining the best of both ideals and refusing to polarize them further for the sake of caricaturization, and personal gain. I do not claim to have an answer or some final say on the matter, I just want to get people's creative juices flowing and hear what we could imagine together if we stopped listening to our own chosen streams of thought... If we stopped worshiping at the monolithic altars of our chosen newsgroups... What would the feast of God's children look like if we truly sat down together and shared, refusing to eat only from one food-group, envisioning instead the beauty of culinary variety and the necessity of diverse sources of nutrition and sustenance. 

Your thoughts?