Why is access to an attorney a "god-given right", while access to health care isn't?

[nodeal]

My friend asked me this question...

"I've been struggling with this issue. Maybe you can help me out.

When Ron Paul spoke about health care, he said it was an entitlement but not a right, and that the only right we have is the right to life and liberty. However, the Bill of Rights says we have the right to an attorney ("the Assistance of Counsel," 6th Amendment). The state pays for these attorneys.

Why is access to an attorney a "god-given right" that the government pays for, while access to health care isn't?"

This is something I couldn't figure out for myself. Any thoughts on this?

 

[trey4sports]

it's not a god given right. I have no clue why the founders decided to put that in there.

 

[brandon]

This is a good question and something that I've never thought of before. Before going any further I think it's important to make the distinction that access to an attorney isn't always a right. The only time you can get free legal counsel is when you are defending yourself against criminal charges by a government. You can't get a lawyer any time other than that, as far as I know.

 

[oyarde]

Because to have access to an attorney , they have you locked up , up to now we have not locked people up due to health care . This is America. If you run up 100k at the hospital and cannot pay the bill , you can file bankruptcy on it . You will not be locked up. In Saudi Arabia , you will not get access to an attorney , after you are tortured for the appropriate amount of time , the Judge will sentence you privately.

 

[oyarde]

it's not a god given right. I have no clue why the founders decided to put that in there.

Probably because they were wise enough to know people in power would lock up people who have done nothing wrong.

 

[oyarde]

Tell your friend , if he wants to go to the Dr. , pay for it . That is what I do . Not really a bad system , I do not like to pay or go , so I only do so if it is serious. If someone else is paying it for you , will that be the case ? I think not ...

 

[CaptUSA]

Good question, but you probably don't really want the answer.

The right to an attorney is the only "positive right" in the Constitution. Why? It extends from your right to defend yourself from the government. If you have a right to defend yourself, you need the availability of counsel in order to exercise that right because the government would be able to deprive you of that right if you did not have an attorney. So to keep the government from removing your right to defend yourself, the constitution demands the government give you counsel.

Now, this doesn't work for health care. Why? Because government cannot invade your right to seek your own health care. If it did, it would be invading your rights. However, that does not mean the government had the duty to provide you health care.

so:

You do have a right to health care if you want it and want to pay for it. The government cannot take that away from you. It doesn't need to provide you with health care.

You do have a right to defend yourself. The government can easily take that away from you if it charges you with a crime. Therefore, to keep government from invading this right, it had to allow you be defended if you cannot afford it.

 

[oyarde]

Disclaimer , I am a huge fiscal conservative and have no desire to pay the Fed Govt for anything outside of Article One , Section Eight. The tenth means I should be able to work through these other issues at a state level which I prefer.

 

[V3n]

If the Government is going to write The Law then they have a responsibility to provide anyone who lives under that Law, the ability to defend themselves against it.

edit: I change my answer to "What CaptUSA said!"

 

[ibaghdadi]

Because law/courts are squarely within the government's mandate. The government runs the courts and hence should provide legal counsel when they prosecute someone.

Providing health care, on the other hand, is not within the government's mandate to begin with. So the question becomes moot.

 

[newbitech]

My friend asked me this question...

"I've been struggling with this issue. Maybe you can help me out.

When Ron Paul spoke about health care, he said it was an entitlement but not a right, and that the only right we have is the right to life and liberty. However, the Bill of Rights says we have the right to an attorney ("the Assistance of Counsel," 6th Amendment). The state pays for these attorneys.

Why is access to an attorney a "god-given right" that the government pays for, while access to health care isn't?"

This is something I couldn't figure out for myself. Any thoughts on this?

criminal justice and health care are two seperate issues.

health care/access to an understanding of what is physically killing them... is encapsulated by "LIFE"
criminal justice/access to an understanding of laws... is encapsulated by "LIBERTY"

The second amendment ensures that the state cannot arbitrarily destroy life by threatening to block someone from health care.
The sixth amendment ensures that the state cannot arbitrarily destroy liberty by threatening to block someone from criminal justice.

If you want to know the truth, the state is not doing an accussed any favors by giving them a "public defender" to represent them. The public defenders job is NOT to help the defendent win their case. The PD's job is to assist the judge and the state attorney in moving the case through the system as quickly (and cheaply) as possible.

Strawman from your friend.

 

[ShaneEnochs]

I've often wondered the same thing. Ron Paul often says that you don't have a right to someone's services, but this seems like the exception.

 

[nodeal]

Good question, but you probably don't really want the answer.

The right to an attorney is the only "positive right" in the Constitution. Why? It extends from your right to defend yourself from the government. If you have a right to defend yourself, you need the availability of counsel in order to exercise that right because the government would be able to deprive you of that right if you did not have an attorney. So to keep the government from removing your right to defend yourself, the constitution demands the government give you counsel.

Now, this doesn't work for health care. Why? Because government cannot invade your right to seek your own health care. If it did, it would be invading your rights. However, that does not mean the government had the duty to provide you health care.

so:

You do have a right to health care if you want it and want to pay for it. The government cannot take that away from you. It doesn't need to provide you with health care.
You do have a right to defend yourself. The government can easily take that away from you if it charges you with a crime. Therefore, to keep government from invading this right, it had to allow you be defended if you cannot afford it.

Great clarity. thanks a lot brother.

...but why would I "not want the answer"?

 

[roho76]

Because someone can drag you into court for anything even if you're innocent and if you don't show say, because your poor and can't afford a lawyer, then your guilty by default. If you can be sued for no reason under the governments legal system that's paid for by you tax dollars then they have to provide you legal representation but your not forced to take it if you would like to defend yourself.

Getting free health care because you fell out of a tree, ate your way to a heart attack, or was doing something you shouldn't be that got you there in the first place is not the private (for profit) hospitals fault and they shouldn't be punish into providing free care. If it's someone else's fault that landed you in the hospital (car accident, you were shot, work related injury) then you can sue them in court to make them pay for your medical care.

 

[CaptUSA]

Great clarity. thanks a lot brother.

...but why would I "not want the answer"?

Sorry, saw the red rep and thought you were trolling.

 

[newbitech]

just wanted to say, the judge giving you a public defender "for free" to uphold your right to counsel is like a cop handing you a pair of handcuffs and asking you to arrest yourself.

 

[trey4sports]

Probably because they were wise enough to now people in power would lock up people who have done nothing wrong.

that doesn't matter.

Because you've been unfairly locked up does not entitle you to someone else's hard work.

 

[mczerone]

it's not a god given right. I have no clue why the founders decided to put that in there.

Because they knew they were coercing people into using their monopoly courts.

 

[trey4sports]

Because someone can drag you into court for anything even if you're innocent and if you don't show say, because your poor and can't afford a lawyer, then your guilty by default. If you can be sued for no reason under the governments legal system that's paid for by you tax dollars then they have to provide you legal representation but your not forced to take it if you would like to defend yourself.

Getting free health care because you fell out of a tree, ate your way to a heart attack, or was doing something you shouldn't be that got you there in the first place is not the private (for profit) hospitals fault and they shouldn't be punish into providing free care. If it's someone else's fault that landed you in the hospital (car accident, you were shot, work related injury) then you can sue them in court to make them pay for your medical care.

that's a terrible argument.

No matter WHY, you are never ever entitled to the work of someone else.


What if you were born with a chronic disease that required intensive, costly care? should you then be granted free healthcare?


Because you have a health issue does not mean that you are entitled to someone elses work.

 

[CaptUSA]

that doesn't matter.

Because you've been unfairly locked up does not entitle you to someone else's hard work.

More like, how hard are they actually going to work for you since they have no choice...

You are right to see this as a positive right and not a negative or natural right. However, in order to protect your natural right to defend yourself, you need access to counsel. That's why it's in the constitution. It does kind of muddy an otherwise clean document, but if you understand the reason for it, it makes sense. Oh, and you are entitled to their work since they work for the government. Just like you are entitled to the government's other protections.