Sandra Fluke

[Black Dog]

So you want the government to pay for you to have sex?

/thread

[Guest American Woman]

She's an embarassment to women, and an embarassment to what feminism was originally all about.

She is? I, a woman, didn't realize that. Good thing there's a man around to tell me how women feel.

[bleeding heart]

She is? I, a woman, didn't realize that. Good thing there's a man around to tell me how women feel.

Sssh. Men talking.

[Guest American Woman]

Sssh. Men talking.

Evidently some are upset that it'll be more difficult to keep women barefoot and pregnant if insurance companies foot the bill.

Edited September 10, 2012 by American Woman

[bleeding heart]

Evidently some are upset that it'll be more difficult to keep women barefoot and pregnant if insurance companies foot the bill.

I don't know just what they're thinking. It's a bit surreal.

Maybe it's just that the controversy erupted with Mr. Limbaugh, and they take their "dittohead" responsibilities too seriously.

[Guest American Woman]

I don't know just what they're thinking. It's a bit surreal.

Maybe it's just that the controversy erupted with Mr. Limbaugh, and they take their "dittohead" responsibilities too seriously.

I'm sure that accounts for some, but I don't give Limbaugh that much credit. There are also those who still reside in the Dark Ages - and some who will go along with whatever the Catholic Church says. I actually believe that the Catholic Church has more power than Limbaugh, or any other factor regarding this issue, does; I think it still exerts a lot of influence.

[bleeding heart]

I'm sure that accounts for some, but I don't give Limbaugh that much credit.

That's probably wise.

There are also those who still reside in the Dark Ages - and some who will go along with whatever the Catholic Church says. I actually believe that the Catholic Church has more power than Limbaugh, or any other factor regarding this issue, does; I think it still exerts a lot of influence.

Yeah, I was being facetious, and I agree with you. Limbaugh is an effect, not a cause.

Edited September 10, 2012 by bleeding heart

[JerrySeinfeld]

Well, sure...he's male. The distinction matters.

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

Some women (and men) just don't like accepting the biological realities of life, so they try to place the "medical problem" label on abortion and contraception to avoid talking the truth: that some 31 year old child wants nanny state to pay for her sex life.

This isn't a men versus women issue. It's a state intervention issue: the more stuff the governments makes sure you don't have to pay for (whether by dircet payment or by decree), the less personal resposibility you have for your own actions and behaviors, the better off the Democrats are.

Obama loves to say "hey if you vote for those guys they'll take away (insert government benefit here)?" And what bigger voting block than 50% of the population to play this little game with.

Edited September 10, 2012 by JerrySeinfeld

[bleeding heart]

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

Some women (and men) just don't like accepting the biological realities of life,

You're simply not thinking your own argument through.

First of all, female contraception sometimes is used, directly and unequivocally, to help with medical problems. That you are unaware of this is 100% your own fault (given the philosophy of "personal responsibility").

Second, Viagra is often (perhaps mostly) prescribed not because of genuine Erectile Dysfunction, but rather because, for fifty year old men ( a crucial Republican bloc, hence the conplete silence on the contradiction), it's simply a matter of things not working quite as quickly as they used to.

Which is not a "medical condition"; it is, as you say, "the biological realities of life."

[Black Dog]

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

Yeah if pregnancy was a medical issue, there'd be doctors and stuff who specialize in it, right? You know, like a bonerologist, but for women.

Some women (and men) just don't like accepting the biological realities of life, so they try to place the "medical problem" label on abortion and contraception to avoid talking the truth: that some 31 year old child wants nanny state to pay for her sex life.

Sense: this makes none.

This isn't a men versus women issue. It's a state intervention issue: the more stuff the governments makes sure you don't have to pay for, the less personal resposibility you have for your own actions and behaviors, the better off the Democrats are.

Except abortion/contraception is taking responsibility for your actions and behaviours.

Obama loves to say "hey if you vote for those guys they'll take away (insert government benefit here)?" And what bigger voting block than 50% of the population to play this little game with.

So basically you resent Obama for saying your kind would do what you say you want to do.

BTW: are you paying Mark Steyn royalties for the whole "30 year old child" line?

[Guest American Woman]

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

Again. Preventing pregnancy by use of birth control pills IS a medical issue. Which is why women need a medical exam and a prescription for the pill.

And fyi, every version of the pill isn't available for $9, and not every woman can be on that particular pill.

----------------------------------

Edited to add: I wonder how many men objecting to insurance coverage of the pill would say, if his sex partner became pregnant, 'she should have been on the pill!'

Edited September 10, 2012 by American Woman

[bleeding heart]

BTW: are you paying Mark Steyn royalties for the whole "30 year old child" line?

Ah. After Shady's remark, I knew that this had been cribbed from somewhere.

[cybercoma]

Erectile Dysfunction is a medical problem. Pregnancy is not.

Last I checked women go to the doctor when they get pregnant.

[cybercoma]

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

Viagara is meant to allow you to have sex. You theoretically don't need to have sex, just as women could abstain if they don't want to get pregnant, which by the way is what you're advocating for people that can't afford birth control.

[waldo]

BTW: are you paying Mark Steyn royalties for the whole "30 year old child" line?

Ah. After Shady's remark, I knew that this had been cribbed from somewhere.

from the grande inquisitor historian himself... I personally get light-headed when reading just how well Steyn weaves his word-magic:

Mark Steyn on Sandra Fluke

: Any space aliens prowling through the rubble of our civilization and stumbling upon a recording of the convention compatible with Planet Zongo DVD players will surely marvel at the valuable peak airtime allotted to Sandra Fluke. It was weird to see her up there among the governors and senators – as weird as Bavarians thought it was when King Ludwig decided to make his principal adviser Lola Montez, the Irish-born "Spanish dancer" and legendary grande horizontale. I hasten to add I'm not saying Miss Fluke is King Barack's courtesan. For one thing, it's a striking feature of the Age of Perfected Liberalism that modern liberals talk about sex 24/7 while simultaneously giving off the persistent whiff that the whole thing's a bit of a chore. Hence, the need for government subsidy. And, in fairness to Miss Montez, she used sex to argue for liberalized government, whereas Miss Fluke uses liberalism to argue for sexualized government.

But those distinctions aside, like Miss Fluke, Miss Montez briefly wielded an influence entirely disproportionate to her talents. Like Miss Fluke, she was a passionate liberal activist who sought to diminish what she regarded as the malign influence of the Catholic Church. Taking up with Lola cost King Ludwig his throne in the revolutions of 1848. We'll see in a couple of months whether taking up with Sandra works out for King Barack. But what's strange is that so many people don't find it strange at all – that at a critical moment in the affairs of the republic the ruling party should assemble to listen to a complacent 31-year-old child of privilege peddling the lazy cobwebbed assumptions of myopic narcissism. Lola Montez was what botanists would call a "sport" – morphologically distinct from the rest of the societal shrub. The tragedy for America is that Sandra Fluke is all too typical.

[punked]

Thank god the Calvary showed up. I was beginning to think no one but Jerry cared about women's health issues and that was a scary thought.

[bleeding heart]

from the grande inquisitor historian himself... I personally get light-headed when reading just how well Steyn weaves his word-magic:

Wow, quite the piece. Tons of innuendo--denied as soon as summoned, and then resummoned again after the pieties of denial have been dispensed with. The "I'm just sayin,' but I'm not really sayin,' bit is, in fact....sayin, while his admirers mistake average erudition for witticism and insight. (Speaking of whoring out for one's pocketbook...I'm just sayin'!

And that's the high point! At least, he might have conceived a mean-polemic for fun's sake, a tradition to which I don't automatically object. Except Steyn, ever his own worst enemy (Climate change "the biggest liberal hoax in history," anyone? Or Iraq as a tourist trap by spring 2004? Earlier Stenynian gems.)....decides that it's Time To Get To His Real Point: liberal narcissism, as personified by "King" Obama and his courtesan-oh-not-really-I'm-just-joking-but-am-I-really?" Sandra Fluke....a woman who is the personification of why America is in trouble.

???

The hell?

Did Steyn never come across the "does not follow" fallacy in his career as musical theatre critic? All literary types are aware of this rhetorical weakness.

Steyn cynically uses it, however--correctly assuming that his readership isn't quite bright enough to follow.

His fans deserve him, anyway, so market principles are sometimes accurate.

Edited September 10, 2012 by bleeding heart

[JerrySeinfeld]

Thank god the Calvary showed up. I was beginning to think no one but Jerry cared about women's health issues and that was a scary thought.

"women's health issues" LOL!!

[BubberMiley]

"women's health issues" LOL!!

That's the new GOP talking point?

They should make it a bumper sticker.

[bleeding heart]

That's the new GOP talking point?

They should make it a bumper sticker.

"Viagra, yes; the Pill, no."

Not too catchy, but then, artistic talent mostly emanates from the left.

Edited September 10, 2012 by bleeding heart

[BC_chick]

Since when is it society's job to finance a 31 year old's woman's sex life?

Nobody's taking away anyone's right to do anything. Wanna be sexually active? Go for it!

Just don't make it the state's business.

You realise in Canada most private insurance companies cover the cost of birth-control right? That's all she's asking for.

[jbg]

Here's a question: Just who the hell does Sandra Fluke think she is?

Well, "who she thinks she is" doesn't matter; Rush has already informed us; we know that she supports the right for women to be sexually active...so she's a "slut," of course!

I have no problem with sexual activity. I do have a problem with being asked to pay for others' recreation.

My wife and I bought and paid for her diaphragm and BCP's ourselves. Ditto condoms. We didn't shake a can so we could enjoy ourselves.

[cybercoma]

I have no problem with sexual activity. I do have a problem with being asked to pay for others' recreation.

My wife and I bought and paid for her diaphragm and BCP's ourselves. Ditto condoms. We didn't shake a can so we could enjoy ourselves.

Yeah, we get it. You're American, so you don't like helping out your fellow citizens financially.

[kimmy]

Erectile Dysfunction is a medical problem.

To borrow your own talking point, it's a "medical problem" that's easily treated by abstinence.

Don't want to be hindered by Erectile Dysfunction? Don't have sex. No prescription necessary. No insurance payout necessary. ED is the easiest ailment in the world to treat, provided the patient is willing to keep it in his pants.

If he wants to have sex, well, gee, that's a little tougher, but "why should society subsidize his sex life"?

I don't want viagra covered either. But it's a lot easier to make the argument that Viagra cures a medical problem, than it is to make the argument that pregnancy is a medical problem.

You're hiding behind the fakest of fake distinctions. Some women (and men) just don't like accepting the biological realities of life, so they try to place the "medical problem" label on abortion and contraception to avoid talking the truth: that some 31 year old child wants nanny state to pay for her sex life.

E.D. is only a "medical problem" for men who can't accept biological reality but still want to have sex. Clearly, the insurance company is quite literally paying to get these flaccid men erect. So why is it that no conservatives have even acknowledged that fact, let alone proclaimed that insurance companies are paying men to have sex?

You guys really are a bunch of gigantic hypocrites.

This isn't a men versus women issue. It's a state intervention issue: the more stuff the governments makes sure you don't have to pay for (whether by dircet payment or by decree), the less personal resposibility you have for your own actions and behaviors, the better off the Democrats are.

Obama loves to say "hey if you vote for those guys they'll take away (insert government benefit here)?" And what bigger voting block than 50% of the population to play this little game with.

uh-uh, you're not getting off the hook that easy.

You can't throw around this line that "Sandra Fluke wants society to pay for her sex life" and then pretend you're trying to have a rational discussion about state intervention. We can have that discussion when I'm done smacking you with your stupid talking points.

So to get back to that, what do you think it says about Catholic institutions that they are literally paying to get men stiff?

-k

[Black Dog]

I have no problem with sexual activity. I do have a problem with being asked to pay for others' recreation.

Does it ever occur to you people that the cost to you of paying for someone else's birth control (and here I'm playing along since we all know that the state isn't paying for Sandra Fluke's birth control) likely pales to insignificance when compared to the costs of an unplanned pregnancy or abortion? Of course that doesn't occur to you because that doesn't sound as interesting as talking about all the dirty, dirty sex you think these dirty, dirty girls are having.

My wife and I bought and paid for her diaphragm and BCP's ourselves. Ditto condoms. We didn't shake a can so we could enjoy ourselves.

Ha ha: sucker.