Tuesday, March 3, 2015

Week One SOC 490

“The Declaration of Independence doesn’t guarantee happiness, only the right to pursue it. You have the right to catch up with it yourself.” – Benjamin Franklin

In the first few lines of the Declaration of Independence it is written that “all men are created equal,” and that they are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” While the ambiguity of this statement has given great freedom to Americans because it solidifies the rights that have been granted to us simply due to being human, it has also opened up further questioning as to what exactly fits into these categories: life, liberty, and happiness. I feel that the first two categories can be interpreted very literally. As American citizens and more importantly, as humans, we have every right to live and live freely in a society without restriction on our views, behaviors, and beliefs. The third point however, is not as clean cut. Happiness. How can one define happiness if it is something different to every single person? And along the same lines, how can it be guaranteed to each and every human if it cannot be clearly defined? Here lies the ambiguity. It is important to realize that the “happiness” itself, in whatever shape of form it may take for any individual, is not guaranteed to every human, but rather it is the pursuit of that happiness that is guaranteed. We as humans are assured of the freedom to go after our happiness, to have access to it, not assured that it would be given to us.

I feel that it is crucial that healthcare should be looked at in the same way. It is a right to human beings, not in sense that medical care is given to us simply because of our human nature, but that we can be assured that we have been granted access to it and have the opportunity to "pursue" it. As Peikoff writes, “All legitimate rights have one thing in common: they are rights to action.” In terms of healthcare, it is a right for all humans to have access to healthcare, but do not forget, we also are granted the right to have access to happiness. These rights are both rights to action. That means access to heathcare cannot include discrimination against any group of humans. No human, regardless of race, age, ethnicity, or class, can be denied the right to take action to receive medical care.


It is also important to look at the natural rights given to us by our Creator and the responsibility we have as humans to care for our physical bodies because God created it. On this topic, Gadium et Spes says, “he is [humans are] obliged to regard his [their] body as good and honorable since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day.” Therefore, we have a responsibility as humans to take measures to protect our physical bodies. Thus again, granting humans the right to access healthcare, the right to take action in caring for our bodies, not ensuring that it is given to us for nothing in return.

4 comments:

  1. hello Abbi.
    I think you did a fine blog. I think the arguments on both sides could be delved into a little deeper. And more of the readings could be cited. I think your comment about the "haircut" example during class was insightful, and I was hoping for more of the same in your blog.I was happy to see you invoke Gaudium, but I think there are some who would suggest Gaudium might actually support the other position. Be sure to tackle the issues in more depth with more analysis of the arguments on both sides.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe whole heartedly in what you are saying. You have used the constitution very well here and did not make up any rights often as people do to fit their agendas. With this argument you are focusing on the individuals' rights and making sure they don't impede upon others' rights. You have the same argument I have, just the fact that you are calling it a right to access, and I am calling it a privilege to access. We both believe it shouldn't be given at others' expenses.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey Abbi,
    I really enjoyed reading this, the history major in me likes the references to the Declaration and Gaudium as well! This was really well written and carefully done it seems, but I have to agree with Professor, I wanted to read more. I do agree with your points, I just want to ask one thing…you cited that we all have the right to pursue happiness according to our definition of what happiness is, I agree. I am just wondering how some people who are chronically ill or who develop a debilitating disease are expected to pursue happiness if they aren't healthy enough and if they can't receive the care they need because they can't afford it?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I enjoyed reading your blog. It helps me see the other viewpoint more clearly. I thought you incorporating Piekoffs view of having to earn your access to healthcare supported your view very well, i do not agree fully with it. There are plenty of college students who do not work, but go to school and get decent grades, yet still use their parents healthcare. They are not "working" for it, while yes college can be very hard at times, but there are people in college who work nearly full time, go to school full time and do not have healthcare because their parents don't have it through their jobs and they can't afford to pay for it themselves so who says they do not deserve it. Or for example people our age who have terminally ill diseases who can't go to school because they are too sick therefore can't be on their parents health insurance so they can't get their treatments or go into crazy debt because they are unable to get healthcare.

    ReplyDelete