This is a forum on ObamaCare, specifically raising the question, "Are we entitled to healthcare?" Great points are made from various perspectives in this discussion. Here is a portion from the argument on www.meandmydoctor.com that I found to be particularly informative and interesting!
Independent of society and relationship to other people, no one has any rights whatsoever. The individual in isolation has no restriction of action except that posed by the physical world. When two or more people are in proximity and therefore have the opportunity for interaction, they still have no restrictions on their actions. They retain complete freedom (but that includes actions such as stealing, maiming, tricking, and killing the other). It is in order to mutually avoid these events that groups of people agree to actions which are to be prohibited and others which shall be allowed with or without limitation. On a larger scale, the participation of every person in this type of agreement becomes technically impractical and unlikely. In that setting, history has shown us the evil that men will do upon each other and from that, we have reflected on what actions are central to our identities as happy individuals. These are things that have been found to be inherent to the human condition in relation to others, such as religious belief, the expression of ideas, and the pursuit of those things necessary for life (food, shelter, etc.). Even these things face restriction when they impact their same expression in others.
Healthcare is a service that is provided through the cumulative knowledge, efforts, and technology only possible through centuries of collective human civilization and cooperation and is a service that only exists within the infrastructure that maintains that civilization today. It is almost impossible in this era to live in isolation, meaning that no one is living apart from this societal web. It is our collective imperative to decide, as a part of our societal contract, whether healthcare is a critical element that should be preserved for all, in some measure, as a "right."
I think it is terribly difficult to argue that a valuable benefit such as healthcare, which has been the product of a complex, interconnected society inherently dependent on the cooperation of its members in myriad ways, should be available in a pattern that excludes any significant numbers of people. I am not alone in this and that is why almost universally ERs are required to service all persons who show up at their doors. ER care, however, requires extensive technology and critical care level services that are highly resource intensive (measurable in the amount that it costs). In contrast, preventative care services have been shown to accomplish a level of healthcare that prevents utilization of such resource-intensive services and results in overall decreased stress on overall societal healthcare resource utilization.
Chronic and acute health issues from preventable diseases/conditions attributable to low levels of healthcare resource provision result in significant amounts of lost productivity in society as well.
So no, healthcare might not be an inherent right (that is, if you're not religious, as many religious traditions endorse care for the sick). But we'd be absolutely stupid to not wish to provide it to all. You'd have to be completely ignorant of the fundamentals of human society, the political history of the world, the amount of healthcare capabilities today, and the dynamics of current healthcare provision.