Quote from Thunderdog:
Except that if you're a so-called "insurer," then your function is to take in premiums and dream up reasons not to pay claims. Imagine the creative free-for-all arising from coming up with every conceivable reason that you should not have done what you did and are therefore responsible, either directly or indirectly for your current "pre-existing condition" or some such. And if you should choose to litigate against the insurer, then you can be sure of one thing: they have more time and money than you do. And with no reform, it shall so remain.
Quote from Thunderdog:
That is such a self-serving bullshit argument on so many levels that I can only surmise your eyes are a deep brown.
As it relates to the selling of organs and the longer-term societal implications? Is that a rhetorical question?Quote from Angrycat:
Questioning your right to dictate what people can and can't do with their own property is a self-serving bullshit argument?
Kindly provide a link, Annie. And try not to be late for your date with John Galt, who I understand is taking you on a date on an island somewhere.Quote from Angrycat:
...But then, when you proclaimed that charity to the poor is "childish" and you couldn't possibly be expected to reach into your own pocket to give to the poor, loser.
Quote from Thunderdog:
No, Ms. Rand, I do not believe people should be allowed to sell their organs, and I am quite convinced that only people with shit for brains would support the idea. Meanwhile, I still await the link in connection to your prior allegation.