Actually we do live in that society right now. I have heard antic-dote after antic-dote about people dying in the streets with a crowd of onlookers afraid to help. I would myself hesitate knowing that if I tried to help, I would be liable for the outcome no matter if what I did helped or not. Tort reform would go a long ways farther in fixing that immoral situation than any number of federal mandates on ME.
YOUR logical failings in this area are:
1. Freedom is the ability to CHOOSE a direction independently, without coercion.
2. Totalitarian Government, and Government Malfeasance are the cause of hunger and sickness all over the world.

So, by your logic, if I don't want to pay car insurance, then I should just stop driving...and if I don't want to pay for health insurance, then I should just stop living, right?

__I think it would be my moral duty to NOT have health insurance, since the alternative is philosophically bankrupt

Medicare and Social Security, two of the biggest Ponsie scheme scams in American History. Already takes up 40% of the budget, and although we would be massively better without it, we can't get rid of it because so many are dependent on it.
What a massively evil twist to what was supposed to be a government run pension, and is anything but.

"Tea-Partiers"...cute, at least you didn't say "tea-baggers".
That political consultants thing is pretty much a no starter, not because people would or would not support it, but because there is pretty much no viable alternative to the massive government run bureaucracies that are in place right now. They are a monopoly and in order to pull it down, you would have to dismantle health care in Europe, completely. Even the stupidest person in the world would see that its better to have sucky health care than none.
Your friend might agree, however there are better ways to do it, I am sure. He would have likely had to wait for his Government Bureaucrat health care worker to have deemed his situation life threatening enough to warrant immediate emergency response, right about when it burst completely.

You must have missed the Heller decision where the court upheld the right to keep and bare arms as an individual right. Or the repeal of McCain-Fiengold. Pretty conservative opinions for a 'liberal' court to make.

"Common Good" has always been a convenient euphemism for what is good for the group of people that hold power at the time. Paying Taxes is not a good thing when the government receiving the taxes continually wastes it on self interest and continually ignores the will of the people. No one will tell you the Health CARE is not a good thing, and that they don't want it, however insurance does not guarantee you health care, and for the majority of healthy people, it is simply another expense. What if someone said to you "I want the freedom to NOT have health insurance if I don't want or need it. There are other means of gaining health care. I don't have health insurance, and I don't want it. I am part of a health co-op, with our own doctors, and hospital, and we deal with barter and a savings plan for emergencies." ? There are many ways of obtaining such care with and without insurance, but we certainly don't need an massive government intrusion into our lives to get it.

They were not only ok with it, "Bankruptcy" is part of the very Constitution you are quoting. You forget that that is a means of legally releasing debt so that people would be able to re-organize themselves without being hounded by creditors. Also the term 'General Welfare' did not in this case mean individual welfare, but the providing of law, and law enforcement to protect people from those who would do them harm.
Two things you are missing here:
1. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are both The Law of the Land. Both are legal documents, and are binding.
2. The Founding Fathers viewed a strong central government with a great deal of skepticism, and thought of it as the main problem in their dealings with the English Parliament and the King. They did not agree to it lightly, and not without STRINGENT controls, namely the Bill of Rights, with which they specifically enumerated controls on that very Government.
Contrary to what certain people would have you think, this Bill of Rights gives you no rights. It simply protects rights that have been already "Endowed by the Creator" as express by the Declaration of Independence.
As far as helping people GET healthcare, there is nothing stopping you, or anyone else from giving any amount of money, time or energy they want to help people. Charity is and always has been a Good Thing, and something that our founding fathers supported.

'Insurance' was not around much when our country was founded. What our Constitution guarantees is not equality of outcome but "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness". There is no 'right' to 'healthcare' and a 'healthy life' is not something you can guarantee anyone. Healthcare is a good, a service, something that is PAID for, not a right granted by the Government to the Governed any more than would granting people the right to a house, or a car. Granting of 'rights' is not something our government is supposed to do anyway:
Life: Happens independently of Government and is something they can only take away.
Liberty: Is the basic right to live life pretty much unmolested by anyone (including fines for just 'living'). Government can only choose to interfere with liberty, or to not interfere.
Pursuit of Happiness: The ability to use your liberty to search for what makes you happy, and a better person.
When a Government goes into the business of GRANTING rights to people, it also becomes the Government's business to take away rights. THIS government, is not our sovereign, but our servant. It exists to protect us, the people from others who would interfere with our Liberty.
As we threw off the King of England, and its Parliament, whose Government was not (and still is not) a Government of the People, and was in the business of granting and removing 'rights', we should also remove from office any Government that would seek to do the same.