What are your thoughts on the fight going on between Rush Limbaugh, and Sandra Fluke?

Let me submit to you that Rush Limbaugh is a steaming cup of diarrhea.

I pretty much tipped my hand on my thoughts in the way I worded the details to this question.

But to add a few very important points, all the Republican talking heads who are claiming that Sandra Fluke wanted taxpayers to fund her birth control are either lying or are commenting on something as if they are experts when they haven’t even bothered to get the facts. Neither Georgetown University nor taxpayers pay for student healthcare insurance. The students themselves must pay out of pocket.

And both Rush and Bill O’Reilly seem to be absolutely clueless about how birth control even works. Both suggested that Sandra Fluke was having so much sex she wanted taxpayers to pay for the pills because the costs were bankrupting her. Neither of these buffoons seem to know that whether you have sex 1 time a month or 10,000 times, you take the same number of pills, 1 per day.

Also, the buffoons don’t recognize that she was testifying about the health impact to women who need to take birth control pills to avoid ovarian cysts and cancer, not to allow all the females on campus to sleep around. Listen to her testimony before Congress in the link I posted in my question. Get the facts then figure out for yourself who has the moral high ground in this fight. That’s why we don’t want the GOP forcing the Government between us and our doctors. They aren’t doctors. They are largely clueless about women’s health issues.

Awe man! I didn’t think it had been asked yet! :(

@AshLeigh Ha! Not to worry. My slant on it was quite different than yours. I asked about the boycott movement to force advertisers to rush away from Rush.

@ETpro glad to hear that. :)
I enjoyed the conversation in class, but I’m obsessed, so I sat there wondering what Fluther would say! Haha.

I’m lurking on this question…

I’m hoping it gets interesting!

It isn’t surprising to me that Rush doesn’t want medical insurance to pay for womens birth control, but it’s okay with him for that same medical insurance to support his drug addiction to Oxycodone.
The man is a filthy piece of slime.

You know you’re doing something right when Rush calls you a slut.

I’m hoping he’ll be fired as some other TV bigots have been; but I’m not holding my breath. The fact that three of his sponsors have dropped him is going in the right direction. I’d love to stick a long pointed needle in his belly and see if he deflates. Unlikely because I don’t think I could get that close to him without vomiting. I’ll have to be satisfied with thinking nasty thoughts about him here.

The guy’s an idiot. End of story.

Rush is a troll. This is what happens when you keep feeding your trolls, America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy2nAOdBUlw

@AshLeigh Since when does health insurance pay for Viagra

@plethora You[‘re at risk of making a fool of yourself here. THe students at Georgetown pay for their own insurance. Rush is simply lying or talking through his butt when he suggests she wants taxpayers to pick up the tab. The issue is that even women that need birth control pills to control ovarian cysts are put through the third degree by the University inquisitors. THey try to force them to admit, despite their doctor’s diagnosis, that they REALLY want it to have sex with all the guys on campus. And even when the University relents, the insurer routinely just denies the claim over and over again. Here is the straight story. Listen for yourself. Get the facts before drawing a conclusion.

And regarding Insurance covering Viagra, some more facts:
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/30/us/insurance-for-viagra-spurs-coverage-for-birth-control.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
http://www.naturesyouth.com/natural.php?iho=7727&BOL=1330459214
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/08/05/289117/hannity-blasts-insurance-coverage-for-birth-control-defends-viagra-that-is-a-medical-problem/
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/30/us/insurance-for-viagra-spurs-coverage-for-birth-control.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=91538#.T1HGrnn9Hcs

Things are so clear and easy to grasp so long as you operate in the fact free zone.

@ETpro You will note that I realized my error by reading an earlier post by you and went back and edited mine. But thanks for the compliment…:)

@plethora Two ships pasing in the night. I was editing mine while you were editing yours, so I did not not it. Sorry.

@plethora, maybe that’s just Alaska? I don’t know what goes on everywhere. Haha.

I wouldn’t mind seeing his free speech glued shut.

Rush Limbaugh is a POS provocateur. I honestly believe that he wouldn’t care if someone nuked the US – as long as Rush got out on his private jet with his drugs and money, first. (Notice I didn’t say beard, er, wife.)

Glen Beck was driven off the air for such drivel.
Andrew Breitbart did the neat trick of dropping dead from breathing the fumes of the venomous brew he concocted daily.
I think Rush is on the way out, and what we’re hearing are the dinosaur’s death throes.

It is music to my ears.

Since when do women need birth control because they want to sleep around? Nearly all women use birth control at some point in their lives. Women use it when they’re married, for crying out loud. Do any men still need to have this explained to them?

Women shouldn’t be have to have ovarian cysts in order to be respected while on the pill, or to qualify for it being included in their prescription insurance. What the heck is wrong with Americans these days?

I think Rachel Maddow put it best. Rush Limbaugh’s job is to outrage people in order to get people talking about his show. The more important problem is that people like Rush, and Mitt Romney, don’t understand how contraception works, yet they advocate for governmental-level control of it based on faulty principles. That’s pretty scary.

Here is a tiny url to the Rachel Maddow show without going through facebook.

http://tinyurl.com/7lvtd9k

(Oops, thanks. That’s what I get for “copy link” without paying too much attention.)

It’s made me realize I’m a total whore for taking birth control and I should go into porn ASAP.~

BTW, if you want to know who owns Rush’s program (along with Hannity, Beck and most of the other clowns), google Rush Limbaugh Clear Channel Bain Capital.

No, I’m not kidding. I’ll wait. ;-p

Well goodness, I have sex between 3–5 times a week, and I don’t use birth control. I must be a reckless whore.

We’re all sluts now.

^ That would include the Viagra-gobbling, impotent slut Limbaugh.

Please, please, please correct me if I am wrong but I need to understand one thing. If healthcare in America is mostly privatized why do I keep seeing arguments saying tax payers should not have to fund contraceptives? And if healthcare companies are privately owned why should the company that is using them have a say in what they cover or not? Again, please correct me if I am wrong, because this is really confusing me. Links to helpful articles would be great. Thanks!

@lukiarobecheck – “why do I keep seeing arguments saying tax payers should not have to fund contraceptives?”—> In this case, it’s because Rush likes to muddy up issues, on purpose, in order to get people all worked up and foaming with indignity and fear and anger, even if it’s about something not entirely factual.

“And if healthcare companies are privately owned why should the company that is using them have a say in what they cover or not?”—> Because you can choose the company or policy that you pay for, to provide those things. Some folks don’t like the idea of paying for something they find morally questionable. It makes no difference that many of these “morally questionable” things have been paid for, for years, with no problem. It’s an election year, and this is how one side motivates their people to go vote. To me (and others), it’s apparent that the particular ferocity of the Republicans in this year’s election circus are the desperate flailings of a party in decline.

I want my healthcare insurance to pay for my toothpaste expenses and I want my car insurance to pay for my oil changes.

@vitro Why not simply say that you think there should be no prescription drug insurance? Or is that not your opinion?

What is your problem with my demands for oral healthcare coverage?

@vitro I want my healthcare insurance to pay for my toothpaste expenses and I want my car insurance to pay for my oil changes. You’re new, so I’m not really sure if you’re being flippant, satiric, totally serious, half serious but also kind of mocking… Care to elaborate and clarify?

@lukiarobecheck That would be because Rush and all the right-wing supporters that are parroting him use Nazi Big Lie propaganda to try to gain prepetual, one-party rule so they can push forward their corporatist agenda for the Greedy Oligarch Pig overlords that fund them.

@vitro It is a free country. Health care insurance is privatized. There is no law preventing your buying a policy that pays for toothpaste.

So, who are the people who listen to Rush; how does he get so big? How many people listening to him are people who really agree with most of what he says, and how many moderate Right people are of the “I don’t agree with lots of what he says, but he makes some interesting points” variety, how many are of the “I love Real Drama” variety, how many are liberals who love to hate Rush and are listening to be horrified/informed (or the combo, horrorformed)?

@Aethelflaed Aha, now you show your true colors. If you are a listener, then you should know that his daily audience is about 20 million far-right ideologues. Sure, a few liberals and independents tune in daily to see what poopaganda he is puking in America’s ears on any given day, but most of his listeners believe every lie that proceeds from his mouth.

If you are a Rush ditto-head, don’t pretend to be a disinterested observer.

@Aethelflaed,

I want the government to force insurance companies to cover my toothbrush, toothpaste, mouthwash, car tune-ups, oil changes expenses just like others want the government to force insurance companies to provide contraception. What is the problem?

@ETpro,

There is a law preventing women from buying a policy that pays for contraception?

@vitro The law didn’t pass, but that is what the Blunt-Rubio bill would have allowed any employer or insurer to not cover any medication or procedure if they claimed they had a moral objection to it. There would be plenty of insurance CEOs who have a moral objection to paying for ANYTHING.

Furthermore, Ms. Fluke’s testimony indicated that the policy she was paying out of pocket for at Georgetown excluded payment for contraception. If a woman is diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and needs birth control coverage to prevent ovarian cysts or cancer, religious institutions routinely put her through a third degree where their inquisitors attempt, despite the doctor’s diagnosis, to force her to admit she really wants contraception so she can be a slut. In numerous cases, and Ms. Fluke’s testimony indicated, even when the religious institution relents, the insurers deny the claims, sometimes with tragic consequences. To compare that with buying toothpaste for you is utterly disgusting. Have you no shame?

If the law didn’t pass, then what you told me applies to those who want contraception. It is a free country. Health care insurance is privatized. There is no law preventing women from buying a policy that pays for contraception.

@vitro There is the law of economics. Have you ever gone out and shopped for a private health care plan exclusive of your employer, or is you are in school, the student healthcare plan? It is so expensive that most working class Americans simply cannot afford it.

If we follow the law of economics, then why did you tell me to go find and purchase an insurance company that will cover my oral hygiene expenses? Knowing that it’s extremely expensive?

Poor oral health not only puts your gums and teeth at risk, but severely puts the rest of the body at risk, specifically the heart, so before you ask me if I have any shame, you might want to explain to me why preventative cancer is more important then preventative heart disease? And it isn’t only toothpaste, it’s a toothbrush and mouthwash (listerine) too.

@vitro I am so sorry. I was actually responding to what you posted. Perhaps I should have been able to read between the lines, or been clairvoyant so that I could realize you wanted to discuss full dental care coverage, and whether it should be mandated. But here is what you actually said, “I want the government to force insurance companies to cover my toothbrush, toothpaste, mouthwash, car tune-ups, oil changes expenses…”. Please be more clear in your posts if you want to have others understand the hidden meaning in them.

We can talk about dental care insurance if you wish. But your original post didn’t go there.

Yes, if the government is going to force insurance companies to provide contraception then I demand it should also force insurance companies to provide me with floss, toothbrushes, toothpastes and mouthwash to prevent oral decay and heart disease!

Likewise with car insurance (tune-ups, oil changes).

@vitro So, do you have a view on Rush or Fluke?

As to why insurance companies pay for BC and Viagra, but not toothpaste – because insurances normally pay for things that require a prescription and/or doctor. You can’t get BC (of the kind that insurance will be paying for) without a prescription, which means a trip to the doctor. You can get toothpaste without a doctor.

Yes, the man is a genius because controversy sells. That is how you build an audience.

Just like those creators who made an iPhone game and called it “Joustin’ Beaver” are now being sued by Justin Bieber for “using his name” for profit without approval which made national news that caused everyone to buy the app out of curiosity, making the creators rich.

As for insurance, there is prescription toothpaste, toothbrush, and mouthwash. Floss too. Colgate has Prevident5000, for example.

I don’t think the issue is contraception, or insurance.

The issue is sex, and that oddly prurient perception of sex as dirty (you slut!) yet titillating (but post the videos online!). Both Catholics and far right Conservatives share that perception.

I think PBO was BRILLIANT to flush that out.

@WillWorkForChocolate, oh you so have us beat, we only do it two times a week. Should mention that’s in our mid forties. Three times if I scrub the kitchen floor!

@vitro My wife just had to have some teeth damaged in an accident extracted. She got bone implants and will soon get titanium posts implanted for single tooth replacements. The surgery was intrusive enough she did need prescription mouthwash. It is covered under her health insurance. Ordinary toothpaste and mouth wash are not. I have no idea how many insurers follow this. All I can report is personal experience here.

I take it your concern is with government mandating what private health insurance must cover. It is a bit odd that government would mandate what employer or student health plans must offer, but not mandate that employers or schools provide any coverage.

Healthcare is a basic human need. Every other developed nation on Earth has figured out how to provide full-service health care to all their citizens. We are at the bottom of the developed world in healthcare outcomes and at the very pinnacle in cost per person covered. So if your point is we’re doing it all wrong, I totally agree.

I believe we should move to a national, single payer system. The best system is the French, which has private health care providers but a national single-payer insurance program. It does include dental care, but not ordinary tooth paste. Of course, if you feel strongly that tooth paste or oil changes should be covered, you are free to advocate for that.

I believe we should take the heath care cost burden off our corporations, since no other developed nation imposes such costs on their businesses, and the cost burden puts us companies at a competitive disadvantage in world trade.

My point is you’re not considering the laws of economics which you quoted earlier (regarding toothpaste, oil-changes). You’re not winning by mandating contraception, toothpaste, etc… You’re losing in efficiency and paying more. Read this, it will clarify. The Real Trouble with the Birth-Control Mandate

You’re not considering the laws of economics regarded healthcare. Socialized Healthcare vs. The Laws of Economics

As for France, I’ll refer you to this analysis. The Grass Is Not Always Greener A Look at National Health Care Systems Around the World by Michael Tanner

Here is the summary…

“Critics of the U.S. health care system frequently point to other countries as models for reform. They point out that many countries spend far less on health care than the United States yet seem to enjoy better health outcomes. The United States should follow the lead of those countries, the critics say, and adopt a government-run, national health care system.”

“However, a closer look shows that nearly all health care systems worldwide are wrestling with problems of rising costs and lack of access to care. There is no single international model for national health care, of course. Countries vary dramatically in the degree of central control, regulation, and cost sharing they impose, and in the role of private insurance. Still, overall trends from national health care systems around the world suggest the following…”

“Health insurance does not mean universal access to health care. In practice, many countries promise universal coverage but ration care or have long waiting lists for treatment.”

_“Rising health care costs are not a uniquely American phenomenon. Although other countries spend considerably less than the United States on health care, both as a percentage of GDP and per capita, costs are rising almost everywhere, leading to budget
deficits, tax increases, and benefit reductions.“_

“In countries weighted heavily toward government control, people are most likely to face waiting lists, rationing, restrictions on physician choice, and other obstacles to care.”

“Countries with more effective national health care systems are successful to the degree that they incorporate market mechanisms such as competition, cost sharing, market prices, and consumer choice, and eschew centralized government control. Although no country with a national health care system is contemplating abandoning universal coverage, the broad and growing trend is to move away from centralized government control and to introduce more market-oriented features.”

_“The answer then to America’s health care problems lies not in heading down the road to
national health care but in learning from the experiences of other countries, which demonstrate the failure of centralized command and control and the benefits of increasing consumer incentives and choice.“_

This collection of facts will also show you why universal healthcare is a very bad idea. A Free-Market Guide to Healthcare

You know that out of the worlds top 20 hospitals, 18 of them are in the United States? Top Hospitals – January 2012

On a general level, I don’t need nor want the government doing anything, period. I can take care of myself, make my own decisions, and handle the consequence that come with it. I don’t need no protection, no help, no guidance. It’s called being self-reliant.

I’m answering the question without looking at previous responses.

What are your thoughts on the fight going on between Rush Limbaugh, and Sandra Fluke?

I think it’s silly. Why are so many people giving Rush the power they are giving him? How are his words hurtful? Words are only hurtful if you let them hurt you. He’s a fat, old white man saying shit for money. Do you really think this woman (who I would have never heard of if it wasn’t for the statements made by Rush) is crying in her bed at night because Rush called her a slut? Seriously? Sarah Palin and her daughter were called worse and Fluther was standing and clapping. Hypocrisy much?

Just read this awesome work:
“Can we please remember that it’s also perfectly fine that women need access to birth control because they really do like having lots of sex and being, generally, you know, sluts? For fuck’s sake, we fought for the Pill and access to contraception because we once thought that boundless sex without consequences—whether with one person or with many, at the same time or sequentially, either way—is a pretty good thing…Women like Fluke are persuaded to emphasise health and negate sex as a primary reason for contraception, and so-called feminists are ramping up the demand for the same by insisting that they don’t fuck and if they do, it would never be wantonly or like “sluts.” Rather than insist that Fluke is not a slut, feminists ought to state, loudly and clearly, that contraception should be provided regardless of a woman’s sex life. The fight for contraception is currently based on arguments about women’s health or, as Fluke delicately puts it, the prevention of pregnancy. It’s time we began acknowledging that women need contraception because they like to fuck. Perhaps if we were more willing to talk about ourselves as sexual beings, right-wing hypocrites would have much less ammunition against us. After all, if a slut is not afraid of openly being one, who can possibly shame her into silence?”

This basically sums up all of my thoughts on things.

@vitro I realize you can find links to libertarian ideologues who will come up with an analysis of why libertarianism is best. Using that method, you can find links that prove that any ideology you care to select is best; be it Austrian School free-market perfection or Soviet style communism. Those two diametrically opposed views can’t possibly both be right. My gues is since both came at their research with a final outcome already firmly in mind, and sought out ways to look at facts or even distort them to justify their confirmation bias, neither is anywhere close to the truth.

I know right-wing and libertarian ideologues scoff at the World Health Organization, but their study of health care did not start with a conclusion in mind. They looked at 4 easily quantifiable healthcare outcome metrics, nation by nation. They measured lifespan, death from preventable causes, infant mortality and deaths resulting from childbirth. These are hard numbers readily available for almost all nations on earth. By those metrics, the US is #37 in healthcare outcomes sandwiched beneath Costa Rica, and above Solvenia. And for this, we pay almost 2 times as much of our GDP per capita as the best systems.

Rather than ideologues screeds, I am influenced by hard facts. I’m a pragmatist. I love liberty as much as any American, and don’t want government going where it isn’t needed. But it is clear that Healthcare is a place where government can serve well. You want to see how healthcare fuinctions with no government, take a look at Somalia. If you truly hanker for a place where no governemnt interferes with your being king of the mountain, what are you waiting for? Somalia, your dream of a perfect nation, awaits.

@jonsblond Rush is the defacto leader of the Republican party. He routinely is a headline speaker at CPAC. Party heavyweights have routinely crumbled and crawled to him in apology when they said something that angered him. His defense is the logic that he’s just an entertainer. The GOP rolls out this garbage to defend him every time his slander goes beyond the pale. But it’s simply not true. He hold far too much political power to simply ignore.

And this blog post should tell you why spewing his hate speech to 12 to 15 million people a day matters.

@ETpro I’m sorry. I’ve got too much going on in my real life to read what @beantown_ mom has to say about the subject. Bill Maher and Dave Letterman have many followers and their hate speech against Palin was applauded by many. Please tell me why it’s ok to say terrible things about Palin, but it’s not ok to say terrible things about anyone who isn’t Palin.

@ETpro,

Um, there is more then 340 sources in that analysis…So what bias are you talking about? Each source is based on a specific fact…

Secondly, you accuse the analysis of bias, and then you link me to the world bank, hah. Anyway, your link is dead, but I checked it out on my own. According to the World Bank, United States life expectancy as of 2009 is 78.1 and France is 81.1 (not a big difference). Have to consider the amount of problems France and other universal healthcare nations have that go along with that extra 1–2 year jump. That is where the analysis comes in. The fact that 18 of the best best hospitals in the world are here in the United states, should give you a hint. Why do you think france started using market instruments? They slowly learn that government is shit. Furthermore, as we go by the laws of economics, the system will be unsustainable soon enough and that will be the end of it.

I’m actually debating with myself whether or not I should support liberal causes to watch them destroy themselves with their own policies.

Somalia is in a process of transition from no government to free-market, so that is a completely invalid argument you made. Furthermore, I touched upon this in another thread, Somalia is growing at a rapid rate. The recent natural disasters didn’t help matters, and neither did the toxic waste, but it is growing steadily. Laws of supply and demand, just as you quoted. Anarchy in Somalia

I could offer you the same advice, If you like Frances universal healthcare so much, then go there and enjoy it.

Arguing over whether the government should mandate that insurance companies provide birth control could easily be avoided by allowing people to purchase their own insurance, just as they do with car insurance, house insurance, etc… (No insurance from employer). This way people who want coverage for birth control could select a health insurance provider that provides this coverage, and their employer wouldn’t even have to know about it. If this happens, insurance costs will be drastically reduced (laws of supply and demand), customer service would be drastically improved (laws of supply and demand), and people would not have to worry about losing their insurance when they change jobs.

@vitro People are legally allowed to purchase their own health insurance, it’s just usually way to expensive for people to really do it.

@jonsblond I think that Democrats who went on about Sarah Palin’s migraines were way out of line as well, but to be fair, she was running for the Vice President of the United States. She had then, and still has at Fox News a massive bully pulpit from which to defend herself. Criticizing her gaffes and her lack of grasp of salient facts that anyone a heartbeat away from being president should have was fair game. That does not compare to rush making up a totally false story about a private citizen, a college student called to testify before congress. Rush flat out lied when he said her testimony revealed that she was having so much sex the birth control pills for it were bankrupting her—that she couldn’t walk home at night because her legs were sore for it. She testified about the medical necessity of birth control in controlling ovarian cancer and cysts, not sex.

@Aethelflaed,

Re-read what I wrote. If you remove employer insurance, the laws of supply and demand kick in.

@ETpro So it’s ok to bash a woman if she is running for office, but it’s not ok to bash a woman if she is just a college student testifying before congress? It’s ok to bash a teenage, pregnant daughter of a women running for office (Bristol Palin)?

And there isn’t a massive bully pulpit with MSNBC?

I want to know why it’s ok to bash Republican women but it’s not ok to bash Democratic women. Reeks of hypocrisy imo.

Hmmm, who knows better about savings and profits regarding preventative care…CEO’s of a multi-billion dollar industry, or some college girl and the government? I rest my case.

@vitro It’d be awesome if you could actually make your case before resting it; I’m still confused as to if you were being satiric when you said you wanted insurance to pay for toothpaste.

@jonsblond It is OK to tell the truth about someone, even when that truth is unflattering. I definitely think picking on Palin’s daughter was out of bounds. I condemn that now, and did then. I think there are laws of decorum that should be held for all political discourse.

You know very well that Sandra Fluke doesn’t have a show on MSNBC. She was interviewed there one time after this blew up in Rush’s face.

So tell me, do you think it was OK for Rush Limbaugh to lie about Sandra Fluke, to claim she is a slut and a prostitute, and to say she has so much sex that she can’t walk due to her legs being sore? Was it OK for him to request, on the air, that she make sex videos and post them on on the Internet for him and his listeners to watch? What did she do in testifying before a congressional committee that justified that sort of attack?

@Aethelflaed,

I did make my case. The insurance companies make billions of dollars a year. They know better then anyone else what policy will yield the most profits. Not Sandra Fluke and the government. The same goes for any business, or individual. I know how to handle my money better then the government does. All the government does with my tax dollars is waste it. That could have been invested in products and services that would yield be an obscene amount of profit.

Of course I was being sarcastic regarding toothpaste. It’s unsustainable. You would pay double, lose in progress, and have no efficiency. Here is some clarity on the toothpaste.. The Real Trouble With Birth Control Mandate

Here is some clarity on the health insurance and the laws of economics. A Free-Market Guide to Healthcare

@vitro I don’t think Fluke is arguing that this policy is the best economically (though, less babies, awesome for the economy…). I think she’s arguing that birth control is a basic human right, and people trying to take it away are misogynistic dillholes.

Well, I did ask you straight up if you were, and you refused to clarify.

@Aethelflaed,

Human rights don’t triumph over property rights which means you cannot force a private company to provide one with X demands.

@vitro Yeah, I’m 100% certain that human rights triumph over property rights. I actually don’t want to live in the Middle Ages.

@Aethelflaed,

Well that is why we have the 2nd Amendment. Anyone tries to mess with one’s liberty and private property, gets a led salad.

@vitro Re your earlier post, how did you conclude that the World Heath Orgainzation is the World Bank? And you seem to have totally missed my point regarding confirmation bias. Of course the link you cited may quote hundreds of sources. Are any of us going to go and read them all to verify that they are credible, and that they actually say what is purported. I certainly don’t have time for that. But I know I could point you to papers published by socialists and communists today that claim just the opposite of your free market screed, and cite just as many sources which I am also not going to read. My point was that whether they come from Libertarian, far-right, Fascist or Communist sources, white papers compiled by ideologues are suspect in my eyes.

As to your post immediately above, actually, the insurance companies charge less for policies that do cover birth control than for those that don’t. Avoiding ovarian cysts, cancers, and unwanted pregnancy is far cheaper over the long haul. That fact makes the whole argument about requiring religious institutions to “pay” for covering birth control ridiculous. What is happeneing is that they are required by the regulation to SAVE money. This whole debate is nothing but political Kabuki Theater.

My bottom line is I do not believe in putting profits above people. The moment you do so, then selling solyent green becomes a perfectly sensible thing to do so long as it turns a handy profit. Slavery is a far more profitable way to farm than paying farm laborers.

@vitro Read the amendment again – it gives you the right to have guns, not kill people…

If you actually want to get the facts straight, then yeh, you would read it, just like I did. If you’re able to refute it, then it no longer becomes a facts. Same goes for any communist stuff.

I can easily do the same to you.. Oh you quoted the world health organization, bias! Invalid.

What you’re basically saying is the infinite wisdom of the government has figured out that the CEO’s of multi-billion dollar industries were just too stupid to realize that providing customers with birth control saves them money. Haha. Not only that, but the tax payers have to pay for another regulation to make sure that private companies are forced to save money. WOW. The logical in here is just mind-boggling.

It’s not up to the government to decide what the insurance company does, first of all. Secondly, those that do offer contraception figured it out on their own, before any government “study”. It attracts members of the market.

@Aethelflaed,

You read it. You think the gun is just for show? To hang up on your wall? lol.

@vitro No, that is not what I am saying. I am telling you that it costs more to buy private health care insurance as a woman if birth control is excluded than if it is covered. That IS from the infinite wisdom insurance company CEOs, acting, of course, on the advice of their actuaries. And in no way does this cost taxpayers more money.

Your point on the report you cite is well taken. My ad hominem is no better than yours. Neither of us appear to be willing to go to the work it would take to verify or debunk the other guy’s sources, so let’s just agree to disagree on that.

So you want the insurance company to lose money rather then the customer?

Regulations are operated by tax dollars. Each group of regulators are assigned to regulate the given industry. By adding another group of regulators to make sure insurance companies offer contraception in their policy, will be at the expense of tax payers.

Just like you have the EPA, the sec, etc… It’s tax funded. The more of it, the more taxes.

@vitro If you are unable to read and understand English, then I do not know how to carry on any meaningful discussion with you.

Ah, I guess I’m also too stupid to understand your infinite wisdom.

You addressed me, keep that in mind. Bye.

@vitro I’d like to see Insurance companies banned from Health Care all together.

This whole argument is so assbackwards. The people who argue against providing sex education and birth control are the same people who scream bloody blue murder when when, shock horror, a young woman gets pregnant and the MAN does a runner. The woman is damned if she does have birth control (she is now deemed a SLUT) and damned if she don’t, (when she gets pregnant and is then considered a leech on the public teet.) Misogynist much?

Spend the money where it makes most sense. On Education and Birth Control.

I’m not responsible for the young woman who got pregnant from a man who does a runner.
I’m not responsible for the bastard child or an abortion. I’m not going to call her a slut if she uses birth control, but I expect her to pay for the birth control, or have someone who wants to pay for it. I expect her to pay for her own education too, or have someone who wants to pay for it.

Let the parents, neighbors, relatives, friends, church, charity help out, if they want.
If not, then you can blame them for not helping.

Since I’m not responsible, I don’t want to pay for education, or birth control.
Since I’m not responsible, I don’t want to pay to fix the consequences for their actions.
I want them to be responsible on their own and to take care of their own problems.

No judgments, just leave me the hell out of it.

You liberals don’t like it when religion passes moral judgement on you, or tries to force feed it, so then don’t you dare pass moral judgement or force feed it on those who don’t agree with your own moral objectives (big-authoritative-regulating-welfare-intrusive-government).

You are right, @vitro. Is sounds like you are not responsible. Not a responsible member of any society I want to live in. You can have your Libetarianism on a island experiment somewhere and you, or who ever manages to survive in your law of the jungle can come back and report to the rest of us how it worked out for you.

Just a minute ago you were complaining about how people pass moral judgments and impose objective morals on women, yet you manage to do the exact same to me.

There is something extremely wrong with you if leaving me the hell alone is intolerable for you. Do you have some kind of compulsive desire to control the lives of strangers you don’t know? I’m sure in a religious thread you’re going to go on about how churches should be separated from state, yet when it comes to your morals, it should be force fed down peoples throats using the government as a tool to do it.

There is the essential problem with your golden rule. You don’t think there is anything wrong with force feeding your own moral objectives down people’s throats, hence you think it’s perfectly acceptable to do it to others even though they object.

Leaving you alone is exactly what I am in favour of. Perhaps you need to read my post again.

No, you’re suggesting I drop everything and leave to an Island. That is not leaving me alone, that is telling me what to do. Yet another authoritative response.

If you actually had a desire to leave me the hell alone, you wouldn’t vote for a big-authoritative-regulating-welfare-intrusive-government. Then I won’t be forced into anything.

@vitro how does the government in the country I live in have anything to do with yours? (other than provide a better example of governance and democracy.)

I assumed you lived in the U.S, but it never-the-less applies everywhere.

@vitro

”...(big-authoritative-regulating-welfare-intrusive-government).”

“I assumed you lived in the U.S, but it never-the-less applies everywhere.”

Everywhere?

What “big-authoritative-regulating-welfare-intrusive-government” rules Antarctica?

@vitro How Norway governs itself is a reflection of its citizens. What’s your excuse?

@ETpro So tell me, do you think it was OK for Rush Limbaugh to lie about Sandra Fluke, to claim she is a slut and a prostitute, and to say she has so much sex that she can’t walk due to her legs being sore?

Yes, it was ok for Rush to say these things. He’s a shock jock. He wouldn’t have the audience he does if he didn’t say outrageous things. Just look at Howard Stern. Would Howard be where he is today if he only said nice, fluffy things about others? No. There is an audience for this stuff and we all have the choice to not listen if we can’t handle it.

@ everyone above… shit just got real!
Women, just withhold sex from men until your rights are recognized. I think it is pretty simple. If all women could boycott men, and not have sex with them until demands were met… it would be game over. “Get those women whatever they ask for” is what all the men in Washington would be running around saying. I would like to see that. Using your feminine wiles in a sort of reverse way. That would be a bold power move the likes of which we’ve never seen before. Women, make it happen.

@lukiarobecheck, you’re a genius! :)

@jonsblond I am now a shock jock. Do I then have permission to say such about you, and have the Mods not remove the comments?

Nobody is claiming Rush or Howard Stein or Michael Savage or Fred Phelps can’t say what they wish. No, the claim is that when they do, we all have a right to say what we think about it. We have a right to say it to their sponsors and to the stations that carry them.

Free speech is NOT a guarantee of a free broadcast platform for any fool that has something to say. We all have the right to speak. We have to win the platform with the message we deliver.

Remember when Don Imus lost his platform and a great deal of his financial compensation from his ugly comment about the Rutgers girl’s basketball team being Nappy headed hoes and jiggaboos? Free speech, but not a free broadcast platform. Imus lost his platform due to the racist, misogynist comments he made, and Rush is heading toward losing his platform as well.