Who really cares for the sick?

Huffington Post's Frank Schaeffer, passionately discusses how the GOP and certain Christian organizations have used scripture to support their opposition universal healthcare in his article Republicans Hijack Religion in Health Care Debate.

Schaeffer claims that people using scripture as a defense of opposition to Obama's healthcare reform bill, are misinterpreting not only scripture but the character of God.

“So a big "Merry Christmas" from your friendly evangelicals, now using this holiday to quash a bill designed to help the poor. And another example of how some evangelicals on the right are willing to trivialize and demean their scriptures in their anti-Obama crusade.”

He supports his claim by referencing scriptures, both specifically and generally. He also directly cites his opponents. He first mentions that the sins that God dislikes the most are taking the Lord's name in vain and using “God for un-holy purposes.” To Schaeffer the latter is the most damning to the his opponents' arguments, because they are preventing the poor from receiving care that is fairly priced.

Schaeffer mostly spends time targeting the manner in which some Christians groups are speaking out against the bill and President Obama. He thinks they are viscous at times.

“From the evangelical point of view, our words must be well pleasing to the Lord Jesus Christ who purchased us with His own blood "that He might redeem us from all iniquity [lawlessness] and purify unto Himself a peculiar people [a people of His own], zealous of good works" (Titus 2:14). May the fruit of our lips always honor "that worthy Name by the which ye are called" (James 2:7)”

Schaeffer's predominately uses pathos in his warrants. He writes passionately and is, himself, clearly biased and unashamed of it. The quotes above illustrate this point quite well.

He also uses some logos and ethos in his warrants. He mentions mid-way through the article that he is the son of a evangelical and goes on to actually claim authority. In doing this, he is attempting to level the intellectual playing field with evangelicals. This might give him some authority when he references scripture later in the article, especially to a liberal audience that may not be familiar with the Bible.

“I was raised by an evangelical leader of the religious right and was his sidekick for a bit before coming to my senses. So this is home territory for me, the stuff I was literally taught at my mother's knee.”

He attempts to use logic for many of his warrants throughout his piece. He clearly has a formula: make passionate statement; Biblical reference; “obvious” conclusion.

“Let's give Jesus the last word (as recorded in Matthew 7:15, 20-23)”

The competing argument was written by Dr. James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family. His November newsletter, Medicare, ObamaCare, and Why Should we Care, Dobson claims that Obama's healthcare reform bill violates the sanctity of life by supporting abortion and robbing (by taking away funds from Medicare) the elderly.

“I’m sure many of you are aware of the assault on the sanctity of human life...It involves outrageous attempts by President Obama and liberals in Congress to force the American people to pay for abortions with our taxes...many of the sick and old will be denied desperately needed care”
He supports his claims by using scripture and his view of what is happening in Washington. Dobson believes that the government is lying about funding abortions and being misleading.

“We suspected at the time that Mr. Obama’s assurance to the American people was not valid and indeed, that suspicion has now been confirmed. Almost all of the health care proposals put forward so far include public funding for abortion.”

He later quotes Matthew 25:40-45 and then goes on to say that our nation will be greatly judged for falling away from scriptural principles.

Dobson utilizes ethos and pathos a great deal in his warrants. First of all, among evangelicals, Focus on the Family is a highly regarded organization, therefore many would agree with the majority of what he says without question. He is a pastor in a sense. He very much speaks with authority.

“The proposals in Congress do not contain sufficient conscience protections for health care professionals.”

I also thought that it was interesting that he used the King James Version when he quoted Matthew instead of a “simpler” version. In doing this, I think he gives himself the illusion of having more authority than the next person quoting scripture.

Later he also worries that our country will be severely punished. By making this claim or insinuating something terrible could happen by the hand of God, he is putting himself in a position of power.

The newsletter is peppered with language that appeals to emotions: “assault; outrageous; killed; cheapened; culture of death; down our throats; etc.” Every description is vivid and powerful.

“I shudder to think of the divine judgment that could befall us if we allow our politicians, who serve at our pleasure, to begin forcing the American people to pay for the killing of babies while they are turning their backs on the elderly!”