Sex-Crazed Co-eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control

**Centurion1** · 03-01-2012, 19:27

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Also something that needs to be mentioned

You take the pill on a schedule. There is no "I'm going to screw the entire football team in hopes we win the big game, so I had better pop 50"

Once again an example of the male disconnect

UGh....I sounded like Gloria Steiniem

I'm going to go take a shower

I think everyone is aware of this I am not sure why it is relevant in the slightest.

**Strike For The South** · 03-01-2012, 19:29

Originally Posted by Centurion1

I think everyone is aware of this I am not sure why it is relevant in the slightest.

Becuase the girl is being framed as some sort of sluf b/c her birth control costs 3,000$

The assumption being if she needs that much she must be a harlot, which is patently false

**Vladimir** · 03-01-2012, 19:37

I don't consider her a slut, just the spokesperson for sluts.

But really, this person should expect to be ridiculed and it's extremely satisfying given that she's being used as a political football. This is like the outrage social conservatives receive. The fact that she's being used as a pawn by a political party I despise makes it more entertaining.

**Strike For The South** · 03-01-2012, 19:42

Why should she be ridiculed when 99% of Americans have used contraception? Or how about the many Americans whom use a medical device or pill to make there day to day lives eaiser?

Her lobbying efforts are no worse than the other vultures who hang around DC

But she is a woman and she is having sex. SO ITS BAD

**Vladimir** · 03-01-2012, 20:06

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Why should she be ridiculed when 99% of Americans have used contraception? Or how about the many Americans whom use a medical device or pill to make there day to day lives eaiser?

Her lobbying efforts are no worse than the other vultures who hang around DC

But she is a woman and she is having sex. SO ITS BAD

You're missing the point and making undue inferences. That's a rather simplistic interpretation.

**Strike For The South** · 03-02-2012, 06:40

Originally Posted by Vladimir

You're missing the point and making undue inferences. That's a rather simplistic interpretation.

Would you care to complicate it up for me? Preferably with some hot wax and chains

No, the bad part is she can afford to go to law school at Georgetown, but expects to have recreational sex on somebody elses dime. That's her responsibility. Life is full of difficult financial choices, get used to it honey. Maybe she could ask Mom & Dad to help pay for it...or, *gasp* get a job.

I agree this is the worst way they could have conveyed there message

**Lemur** · 03-02-2012, 06:45

For anyone who argues that this is a strictly 1st Amendment religious liberty issue, please explain the Blunt Amendment, which would carve out an exception for any form of healthcare that any employer objected to on any religious grounds. Think about that. Let that sink in.

So if your employer declares that he is a faith-healing worshiper of Baal, you are allowed to get whatever treatments he deems fit. And if the board of directors are Christian Scientists? Good luck, pal. This amendment received overwhelming Republican support in the Senate. Details:

Introduced by Missouri Republican Roy Blunt and cosponsored by Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown in the heat of the debate over making contraception coverage mandatory as part of preventive health care for women, the amendment looked like a good vehicle for Republicans seeking to make the debate about big government trampling on religious freedom. But polls have since shown that the religious-liberty argument has been undercut by successful Democratic efforts to characterize it as a war against women, and comedians portraying it as the GOP’s war against sex. [...]

The Blunt amendment goes beyond religious institutions, allowing any employer that, for example, disapproves of smoking or drinking to potentially withhold treatment for those behaviors. After weeks of overreach on women’s issues, including a debate over invasive probes as part of a bill in Virginia requiring women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound, you would think that Republicans would be looking for a way to get back to the economic issues that were supposed to define this election year.

**Hosakawa Tito** · 03-02-2012, 00:31

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Why should she be ridiculed when 99% of Americans have used contraception? Or how about the many Americans whom use a medical device or pill to make there day to day lives eaiser?

Her lobbying efforts are no worse than the other vultures who hang around DC

But she is a woman and she is having sex. SO ITS BAD

No, the bad part is she can afford to go to law school at Georgetown, but expects to have recreational sex on somebody elses dime. That's her responsibility. Life is full of difficult financial choices, get used to it honey. Maybe she could ask Mom & Dad to help pay for it...or, *gasp* get a job.

**ICantSpellDawg** · 03-02-2012, 05:16

My fiance's birth control is $9 every month without insurance at Target. She has one of those evil Catholic health care plans. You know, the ones that cover everything except birth control with minimal co-pays while most of us are paying 80% coinsurance. This discussion is a joke and it is about the Federal government imposing it's will on a free people and subverting the 1st Amendment. I hope the church cancels the plans and pays the fine so that the newly "liberated" employees can go find much better plans on their own. I'm sure that these people will be sending thank you letters to the President himself.

The thing that I love about the Church is that it might actually take this route. They closed up their adoption agencies in Massachusetts due to conscience differences. Maybe the government can go back to feeding us to the Lions. We did pretty well back then and they collapsed for a time.

**Lemur** · 03-02-2012, 05:22

It's great that we can have a debate almost entirely predicated on Rush Limbaugh, but without crediting him.

I am stunned by the responses in this thread. Are you anti abortion? Nodding right now? Then support easy access to birth control. Abstinence education is empirically proven to be less effective than nothing, so if you've got a better idea, slap it on the table.

Seriously, I thought we were done with debating the morality of birth control in this country. What other settled issues shall we revisit? Sanctity of property? The right of the Federal government to build highways? What the fudge is going on here?

**Vladimir** · 03-02-2012, 20:42

Is this what Lemur was talking about:

http://todayonthetrail.today.msnbc.m...unned-outraged

**PanzerJaeger** · 03-03-2012, 01:47

I don't know why this issue has to be framed in the context of religious freedom. The idea behind Obamacare is to ensure that no one is financially ruined by unforeseen medical issues. While contraception is prescribed by a doctor, I don't believe that it falls under that mandate. (Obviously I'm speaking of contraception prescribed solely for contraceptive and not medicinal purposes.) $1000 per year in birth control is a lot of money and I'm just not sure society should carry that burden. (Maybe that's why the cost estimates for Obamacare recently jumped $100+ billion.) Being sexually active is a choice, not an untreatable condition.