Final answer:
The thesis statement in the paragraph is that access to universal healthcare is a moral obligation of any civilized society, not just a basic human right. The debate encompasses constitutional interpretations, UN definitions of human rights, and the moral philosophies underpinning social contracts between governments and citizens.
Step-by-step explanation:
The thesis in the provided paragraph is choice (d): "No, access to universal healthcare is instead the moral obligation of any society that dares to call itself 'civilized.'" This statement serves as the main argument of the paragraph, which the author uses as a foundation for their subsequent reasoning. The discussion revolves around whether healthcare is a basic human right or a moral obligation of a civilized society.
Debates on healthcare often involve assessing various governmental policies, analyzing constitutional powers, and considering the philosophies of political theorists like John Locke and Thomas Hobbes. The United Nations (UN) describes human rights as inherent and inalienable, including the right to health. These debates are also shaped by the historical context of the US Declaration of Independence and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which establish the pursuit of happiness and life worth living with protections and freedoms such as the right to food, education, work, health, and liberty.
Ultimately, the position that healthcare forms part of a civil right and moral duty is solidified by the social contract that governments have with their citizens, ensuring their general welfare and meeting their basic health needs. This is evident in both developed countries with complex healthcare systems and in developing countries where basic healthcare services are often facilitated by international organizations.