 |
 |
E-mail to my class after a lecture. From: Uwe E. Reinhardt [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 6:31 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: The New testament and social ethics I mentioned in class today that a major obstacle to coherent health reform in this country is the lack of a consensus on the social ethic our health system should obey -different theories of social justice imply different ethical precepts for health care. For some reasons best understood by anthropologists, most other developed nations have managed to reach such a consensus, and their health systems reflect it. In this regard I found both amazing and somewhat entertaining this recent set of commentaries by Rush Limbaugh and Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC's "The Last Word" program. See here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nv-xMIwm01s O'Donnell argues eloquently. But Rush Limbaugh could come back and argue (he probably will) that the New Testament refers here to private, voluntary charity (the Libertarian's credo), and not coercive tax-and-transfers by government . Furthermore, if Limbaugh knew the New Testament well (for all I know he does) he might cite this passage to O'Donnell: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+25%3A14-30&version=NIV Taken at face value, without a Christian minister's or priest's interpretation, this passage could be a hedge-fund manager's delight. As O'Donnell notes in passing, holy books often suggest conflicting social ethics. It takes a religious leader to straighten out the contradiction. You can find such efforts on the web as well. I thought many of you might find this interesting.