(I apologise for the long post. I just wanted to clarify some things, and despite having no scholarly background I find the US Constitution to be rather interesting at times due to how many different ways the same things have been interpreted).

The problem with the argument I mentioned is that it’s a bad faith argument designed to use false accusations to make the pro-healthcare side look “tyrannical” towards doctors, despite access to healthcare has nothing to do with forcing a doctor to do something.

The problem with American healthcare isn’t doctors not wanting to help patients, it’s the way it’s designed to be as profitable as possible for the insurance companies in the middle even if it kills people due to it resulting in raising the prices far higher than it should be (the price of Insulin in the US vs elsewhere is a good example).

Also I want to make it clear I wasn’t attacking the 2A here, I was attempting to point out that the essential nature of healthcare and a gun can overlap. The thing about the 2A was:

1) that some people assigning a higher priority to gun ownership than someone’s access to healthcare is bizarre, considering that the 2A is frequently quoted as being to protect the people from the government and yet America’s privatisation of Healthcare by the government results in countless deaths yearly.

2)) the Constitution was never designed to be omnipresent or omnipotent, it’s actually extremely vague on the majority of things and mostly provides a basic framework. It was also designed to be updated over time.

3) Remember: the 2nd Amendment wasn’t actually even in the Constitution at first. It was added later on, and that’s why it’s called an Amendment.

I understand that the contents of the Constitution are important to America, I’m just pointing out that just because something was not added as an Amendment two centuries ago doesn’t mean that it’s not something important, and it doesn’t mean that adding more rights to the Constitution is a bad thing - after all, the Constitution originally protected slavery until that was abolished by the 13th Amendment in 1865 (almost a full century later).

I guess what I’m saying is the Constitution is a good thing, but that it’s harmful to treat it as a finished product that’s permanently set in stone, when it was never intended that way.