If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.

Only if the doctors aren't allowed to then receive payment for the treatment.

Giving somebody food out of basic kindness is called "charity" and it is a personal choice. Very different from the government forcing someone to give the fruits of their labor for a price they don't control. In the UK the NHS pays doctors and nurses so little that they have a shortage and need to import them from 3rd world countries.

Not trying to invoke Godwin's law here, just going to a logical extreme; if somebody brought Hitler into the hospital with a life-threatening emergency and the doctors refused to treat him, would you be up in arms about how the government should be forcing those doctors to save his life? Or would you be arguing that the doctors should have the right to refuse to treat whoever they choose?

Ugh. I hate getting law nerdy, and not using meme's but your understanding is so beyond reality that I can't let it go in case someone believes you. In the United States, barring a special relationship or statute, no one has a duty to rescue, because a moral obligation does not equal a legal duty. People v. Beardsley, 150 Mich. 206, 113 N.W. 1128, 13 L.R.A., N.S., 1020. Only 10 states have some form of duty to rescue: California, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin

As to your specific scenario, the Dr. has no personal responsibility towards the patient in the ER unless the person was already a patient, which constitutes that special relationship mentioned previously. It's easier to see when we change the location. The Dr. is at a restaurant having dinner and the person at the table next to him falls down with a heart attack. The Dr. has no obligation and is free to continue eating his dinner.

However, in your scenario, the patient walks into the ER. In this instance, the hospital is forced by the Emergency Medical and Treatment Labor Act (EMTLA) of 1986 to provide services to that person. Without any admission of the appropriateness of the EMTLA on my part, under the Dr's employment contract with the hospital, he is now obligated to provide services. He will, however, be paid for those services under which he is contracted.

So just to sum up, a) no one has a duty to rescue in the US baring a special relationship or statute, and b) the only reason your Dr. has to treat the man in the ER is because he has a prior contract to do so, for which he is compensated, therefore no slavery exists on the part of the Dr. However, the payment of the bill doesn't magically disappear. Either the patient still has to pay, or the government steps in and pays. In the case of the government paying, the government has confiscatoraly taken money from other citizens and used that money to pay the medical bills. And as you know, slavery is the confiscatory taking of one person's labor for the benefit of another.

Now for the legal disclaimer: The above is the opinion of the writer and does not constitute any form of legal advice because the writer has been out of the legal industry for more than a decade because being a lawyer sucks ... in his opinion. If, for some reason you're dumb enough to take a couple paragraphs from a meme website as justification to do something stupid, that's on you.

Yes, the Dr. in the ER must treat an actual emergency patient, and that act makes the rest of us slaves.

I guess the Dr is still a slave because his taxes are paying his salary so he's essentially forced to give away part of his services for free.

Also: "That's not invoking Godwin's Law, because you aren't comparing anyone to Hitler."

Yeah, but you even mention Hitler, and some idiot is bound to start yelling "You invoked Godwin's Law, you automatically lose teh argyoomentz!"

Well congratulations, you just became the alt-right in the eyes of regressive leftists.

I mean, I'm pretty sure you already were, but that just sealed it.

Very true, so I hope you're socking away your money under the mattress, because the way the far left is going, soon you'll start getting your credit cards cut off and your bank accounts closed without warning, simply for being identified as far right, even though you're not.

there more than one doctor you can go to you know

Yes. Say what you will. Simply reacting based off your emotions and not considering the implications is what has lead us to the socialist he'll many of us are in today.

You're talking about some law that was passed. It's not in the Constitution that doctors must do this, that a certain subset of private citizens MUST perform some duty.

By definition, yes, the law has legally turned the doctor into a slave, at least until they resign from their position. However, I'd think most people who wanted to become a doctor would WANT to save an innocent life. If they're willing to do it, it's not the issue.

Problem is when we get people clogging up these emergency rooms with colds, broken bones, wanting pregnancy tests, and other ridiculous nonsense.

Also. You don't really have much point.