If healthcare should be provided to all American citizens or not, weighs at the base of many debates today. On one side of the debate, people argue that healthcare is a right that should be granted to every American citizen. While on the other side, people argue that healthcare is not a right but a service that American citizens need to basically provide for themselves. It matters not that only the rich can afford healthcare while the poor suffer from the decision of paying for medical or for other necessities. After all, there is no law that grants people the right to anything for free. In Pro 2, Pope Francis states that health care is not a good, it is a universal right, therefore everyone is entitled to it. Yet, the poorest are often denied services because they lack …show more content…
Some cases for it state that health care is a universal right, not a good or service and that it should be provided for all. That health care should not be linked to one’s employment. And providing adequate healthcare to all will give us the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health. While on the other side of the debate they state that health care is not a right. That no one should provide for anyone else who does not provide for themselves. That health care should be treated no different than food, shelter, and clothing. The government does not provide for these items, therefore, they should not provide for healthcare. Moreover, if the everyone has access to health care then spending and taxes shall explode because people would demand far more than what they need simply because they no longer have to pay. There would be fewer doctors due to the decrease in income. Making health care affordable for all could mean giving up our freedom of choice just to have adequate care. I for one do not want adequate care if I am suffering. I want doctors to go the extra mile to minimize any pain I may