Search This Blog

Thursday, August 20, 2009

WWJD: Health Care Reform and the Golden Rule

At the Michael Vick/Philadelphia Eagles press conference on August 14, Tony Dungy related that when he first visited MV at Leavenworth, he asked him, “Where was the Lord in all this?”

This set me thinking. Relative to the health care reform debate, “Where is the Lord in all this?”

There has been scant reference to the culture’s dominant Christian ethic from either side of the debate. More to the point, relative to health care reform, WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

As one who monitors religion and American culture, the absence of Christian ethics in the health care reform debate is resounding, especially in light of a relatively recent rave to wear bracelets inscribed with WWJD—WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

President Obama, by posing this question, would significantly challenge the anti-reform protestors. Mr. Obama could once again reference the Golden Rule, his favorite ethical rubric.

Christians have long associated the Golden Rule with Jesus’ teachings as well as with Jewish scripture. Luke summarizes Jesus’ proclamation also referenced in Matthew: “And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” (Seniors who enjoy Medicare might find insight here.)

There are other relevant Christian reference points, too: feeding the multitudes at the Mount; the declaration that “whatever you neglect to do unto one of these, you neglect to do to me;” healing the sick; and even raising the dead, begin an easy list of Jesus’ acts of charity.

In my estimation, at heart, Mr. Obama has time and again revealed himself as a Christian moralist who preaches egalitarianism rather than as a power-craving socialist. He has frequently cited the Golden Rule as a standard for personal behavior and for achieving social justice.

When confronted with responding to the question WHAT WOULD JESUS DO, could the opposition to health care reform persuade a Christian majority that Jesus would have sided with the big insurance or pharmaceutical companies, or have denied coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, or excluded undocumented aliens from coverage, or favored seniors at the expense of the larger population or favored the larger population over seniors, or favored men over women or vice versa…? That would be a hard, if not impossible, sell.

Dominic Crossan, a leading scholar of the Jesus Seminar, has argued persuasively that the historic Jesus was essentially an egalitarian who favored no one group over any other group. Logically, universal health care would be the moral result of applied Christian egalitarianism, where all are treated equally and each respected individually.

This is my modest proposal: Mr. Obama, recast your health care reform initiative. Call it henceforth “Golden Rule Health Care—An Egalitarian Solution.” The Christian majority could claim the Golden Rule as expressing Jesus’ ethic, while a larger community could cite the Golden Rule as a universal principle found throughout world religions and philosophies. And no one would dare speak against social egalitarianism, at least in the sense that "all men are created equal" with natural rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness

Such a recasting of health care reform would fit Mr.Obama’s criterion that faith or belief inform public policy only by appealing to universal principles. In Mr. Obama’s own estimation there is no more universal principle than the Golden Rule.

2 comments:

Diggitt said...

Splendid idea, Ed! If only he had.

MWorrell said...

In my view, Jesus spoke primarily to the individual, because the individual is subject to introspection, conscience, self-examination and repentance. One of my favorite books is "Moral Man and Immoral Society" by Reinhold Niebuhr. The essential thesis is that governments are incapable of behaving on moral parity with individuals, and that looking to them to do so is a futile endeavor that misses the point of effective government.

Among my Christian friends are many who shame me with their extravagant charitable giving and personal sacrifices on behalf of others. They are utterly committed to the Golden Rule and living it. But these same folks often don't see the wisdom in sending a full tax dollar to Washington in order to render 25 cents worth of charity down the line, with that very 25 cents financed by borrowing from China.

As a self-employed freelancer, I stand to benefit just about as much as anyone from guaranteed, affordable public health benefits. I just hope legislators have the backbone to do what it takes to truly pay for it. I despise insurance companies, but to turn instead to the government doesn't seem much like trading up, and might just amount to a lessening of accountability and responsiveness to the individual.