Sex-Crazed Co-eds Going Broke Buying Birth Control

[ICantSpellDawg]

And yet 26 states already require religious-affiliated businesses to insure birth control. That's 26 wars on religion that we're not paying attention to! Why should the states get a free pass for oppressing Saint Vuk's Hospital?

The idea is unheard of in NY. We don't require religious hospitals to insure using plans that pay for birth control. You are defending the administration. I wouldn't mind paying for people to have birth control personally - buying in bulk, but I like a division between my Church and the government's politically motivated demands. I know that this particular fight is about Religious liberty. Usually it is about us trying to unravel the red tape before it is too late, but the largest part of this fight is a real one, not AstroTurf and not an attack specifically on the health mandate. Commonweal went nuts, organizations that supported the AHCA were up in arms. Less so after the "compromise", but they are more reticent of some people in the administration than they were before and the White House has been doing some unexpected damage control within their own coalition.

[Strike For The South]

Being a constitutionalist is a bad thing? Man, you're in the wrong country!

That's not what I said

[Lemur]

The idea is unheard of in NY. We don't require religious hospitals to insure using plans that pay for birth control..

New York allows "religious employers" a waiver for birth control, but I'm not clear on whether that includes their affiliated businesses. I suspect you may be in the wrong; New York has been listed as one of the states where The Holy Heart of ICantSpellDawg Hospital does, in fact, have to include birth control on its insurance.

I know that this particular fight is about Religious liberty.

Then why, when pressed and debated, does every supporter wind up admitting that they just don't like Obamacare and want to take it down any way they can?

This is a ginned-up conflict, and what's worse, it's playing out very badly for the folks who ginned it up.

[Kralizec]

The idea is unheard of in NY. We don't require religious hospitals to insure using plans that pay for birth control. You are defending the administration. I wouldn't mind paying for people to have birth control personally - buying in bulk, but I like a division between my Church and the government's politically motivated demands. I know that this particular fight is about Religious liberty. Usually it is about us trying to unravel the red tape before it is too late, but the largest part of this fight is a real one, not AstroTurf and not an attack specifically on the health mandate. Commonweal went nuts, organizations that supported the AHCA were up in arms. Less so after the "compromise", but they are more reticent of some people in the administration than they were before and the White House has been doing some unexpected damage control within their own coalition.

For the purposes of this discussion, seperation between church and state doesn't mean any more (or shouldn't, at any rate) than that the government doesn't interfere with the religious institutions as such. If a government introduces legislation that turns out to affect some enterprise or organisation that is not inherently religious, but affiliated with a religious institution, that's not the problem of the government.

On a related note, I don't even get why people make such a big issue out of it. None of this forces people to, or encourages them to use contraception.

[Vuk]

On a related note, I don't even get why people make such a big issue out of it. None of this forces people to, or encourages them to use contraception.

That is not at all the issue.

[Kralizec]

Maybe you didn't notice, but that was adressed at Icantspelldawg. If you're off the opinion that religious arguments are completely out of place here, I agree.

[Vuk]

Maybe you didn't notice, but that was adressed at Icantspelldawg. If you're off the opinion that religious arguments are completely out of place here, I agree.

I'm sorry, did you mean that as a private message, or did you post it on a public discussion board?

[Kralizec]

Of course not; you can reply to any public post. But I haven't seen you correct Crazed Rabbit or Icantspelldawg who seem of the opinion that covering contraceptives is an issue in itself.

[Vuk]

Of course not; you can reply to any public post. But I haven't seen you correct Crazed Rabbit or Icantspelldawg who seem of the opinion that covering contraceptives is an issue in itself.

The issue is forcing a religious institution to do something that goes against their moral beliefs. No one cares if people use contraceptives, they just don't want to force religious institutions to finance things they don't believe in. I don't know what CR or ICSD have been saying, because I have only read the last page of the thread, starting with Lemur's racism accusations.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I don't know what CR or ICSD have been saying, because I have only read the last page of the thread, starting with Lemur's racism accusations.

Well there's your problem.

[Strike For The South]

The issue is forcing a religious institution to do something that goes against their moral beliefs. No one cares if people use contraceptives, they just don't want to force religious institutions to finance things they don't believe in. I don't know what CR or ICSD have been saying, because I have only read the last page of the thread, starting with Lemur's racism accusations.

Once again, THEY ARE TAKING GOVERNMENT MONEY THEREFORE THEY WILL BE SUBJECT TO GOVERNMENT RULES

[Lemur]

Lemur's racism accusations.

Ah yes, I responded to silly rant about how Obama would end capitalism and force us all into collectivization with a my own torrent of silliness invoking Stalin and the Khmer Rouge, but all anyone saw was the word "." And when I edited that to read "Marxist," you're still going on about it two days later. Hosa even altered my quote to re-insert the word, 'cause we need to get our inujuredness in, at any cost.

And you wonder why I say the right-wingers are sniffing victim-scented glue? Seriously. Contrast my (rather silly) post with the howls of pain and anguish coming from yourself. Contrast and compare, and then tell me who's harping on race. I made a single joke in the middle of a series of jokes; you lot are acting like someone kicked your momma and won't stop hurting the innocent old gal.

There's a substantial debate to be had on this subject, and we've been going at it, despite the relentless dirge of how horrible I was to reference the president's race, two days after the fact, and after I edited the offending word out. (I guess the memory of your pain is enough to keep it alive? Kinda like PTSD? Please, show me where the bad lemur touched you on the doll, Vuk.)

-edit-

And just a little reminder on how this issue is playing out with the public at large (hint: not well)—

Mika Brzezinski reviewed new polls showing President Obama ahead of all the GOP candidates, and contributor Mark Halperin remarked that recent weeks have been a "bad period for the Republican party."

Scarborough agreed, calling the polls "absolute terrible news for a Republican party that has been working overtime to tarnish their brand." He argued that the Republican party lost a key opportunity when the Obama administration ruled that employers must include contraception in their health insurance plans.

"They had the advantage when all the Catholics were on their side but they couldn't leave it alone and it just continues with one statement after another that makes them look like they're hostile, not just to Democratic women," Scarborough lamented, referring to other controversial comments that Limbaugh and other Republicans have made about the issue.

He said that his wife had even directed him to tell the Republican party to focus on the economy and leave women's health alone. "This has been going on for a month," he continued. "I swear, what is wrong with these people?"

A recent Kaiser poll has some indicative data:

Americans who say they agree with the Federal mandate for birth control: 63%
Americans who say they want politicians debating birth control: less than 1%

The GOP has chosen a disastrously bad strategy on this one. This is what we call an "unforced error" in sports.

[HoreTore]

I haven't bothered to read the whole thread, so I don't know where the thread is right now(I suspect it's been de-railed about 3 times), but I'll give an answer to the OP:

Yes, birth control should be freely available, and preferably free. I get condoms in my mailbox every now and then, it's quite nice.

[Rhyfelwyr]

And for the last time RHY For birth control to work you have to continually taking it. Yes she could've been banging 10 dudes a day or she could've been in a committed relationship only sleeping with one man or even still she could have not been having sex at all.

Anyone who calls this woman a slut doesn't understand birth control and is simply parroting b grade teen comedy

OK. I apologise for presuming she is a slut when I didn't know how the pill works. I just like to be dramatic and throw around wild accusations. I am sorry.

That's a strange way of putting it. The blurring of lines between churches and their businesses has been the core of the GOP argument for why a relatively obscure insurance rule is a War on Religion. If anything, in this thread, I've had to hammer the distinction five or six times before anyone could be bothered to note it. I don't think that's a failure of comprehension; that's willfully ignoring a distinction that wasn't convenient to the outrage and look-at-the-stupid-sluts line of humor that constituted the first page of this thread.

Well to be fair, the first page was concerned with that because the OP appears to address that one particular argument, rather than the concerns that were purely or at least primarily medical in nature. Let's try to keep focused on addressing the arguments themselves, rather than turning this into another us v them debate and presuming that every argument from one side is being put forth by everyone on that side.

Yeah, 'cause reproductive health concerns are recreational in nature. And a bunch of dudes are fit to make that judgement, rather than the stupid sluts. Oh, wait, you're getting to that ...

Well, those reproductive health concerns are only there because of the recreation they are choosing to pursue. I don't believe that my gender changes that fact.

So not only do we have a Stupid Sluts argument, we cap it with "that was a dumb move, she looked bad, the Dems came out on the bottom so phooey" thing.

Well that is exactly how things appeared. At least until Mr. Limbaugh stepped in, but we'll get to that...

Problems with that argument: (1) The stupid slut has garnered far more public sympathy than you acknowledge. As a GOP lawmaker put it today, "Rush’s attempt to increase his ratings and get noticed again do hurt Republicans. Beating up on a college student is not good optics, and refocusing on her argument that this is about contraception [...] is simply not very helpful to the cause.”

Yes, Rush handed this very poorly and he seems to have flipped the public's perspective on this girl from being a whore to being a poor victimised college girl. When you're a public figure you have to watch your mouth.

and (3) you are a dude declaring that birth control is not basic healthcare. Which puts you off the reservation with just about any medical group anywhere.

I don't care.

I think the fact that most of the rightwing Orgahs just plain want Obamacare gone is making this more of a quagmire than it needs to be. Do any of you really think this is an assault on religious freedom? Seriously? I mean, I know that's the talking point, but you don't actually believe that bullhockey, do you?

Well I'm certainly not coming from an anti-Obamacare perspective, I love my NHS and hate how the current government is dismantling it. As for it being an assault on religious freedom, I do not believe that Obama meant it to be some sort of wicked plot to submit the church to the state. But I think that a side effect of this policy is that it does infringe on peoples' freedom of conscience without sufficient reason.

[Vuk]

Ah yes, I responded to silly rant about how Obama would end capitalism and force us all into collectivization with a my own torrent of silliness invoking Stalin and the Khmer Rouge, but all anyone saw was the word "" And when I edited that to read "Marxist," you're still going on about it two days later. Hosa even altered my quote to re-insert the word, 'cause we need to get our inujuredness in, at any cost.

And you wonder why I say the right-wingers are sniffing victim-scented glue? Seriously. Contrast my (rather silly) post with the howls of pain and anguish coming from yourself. Contrast and compare, and then tell me who's harping on race. I made a single joke in the middle of a series of jokes; you lot are acting like someone kicked your momma and won't stop hurting the innocent old gal.

There's a substantial debate to be had on this subject, and we've been going at it, despite the relentless dirge of how horrible I was to reference the president's race, two days after the fact, and after I edited the offending word out. (I guess the memory of your pain is enough to keep it alive? Kinda like PTSD? Please, show me where the bad lemur touched you on the doll, Vuk.)

-edit-

And just a little reminder on how this issue is playing out with the public at large (hint: not well)—

Mika Brzezinski reviewed new polls showing President Obama ahead of all the GOP candidates, and contributor Mark Halperin remarked that recent weeks have been a "bad period for the Republican party."

Scarborough agreed, calling the polls "absolute terrible news for a Republican party that has been working overtime to tarnish their brand." He argued that the Republican party lost a key opportunity when the Obama administration ruled that employers must include contraception in their health insurance plans.

"They had the advantage when all the Catholics were on their side but they couldn't leave it alone and it just continues with one statement after another that makes them look like they're hostile, not just to Democratic women," Scarborough lamented, referring to other controversial comments that Limbaugh and other Republicans have made about the issue.

He said that his wife had even directed him to tell the Republican party to focus on the economy and leave women's health alone. "This has been going on for a month," he continued. "I swear, what is wrong with these people?"

A recent Kaiser poll has some indicative data:

Americans who say they agree with the Federal mandate for birth control: 63%
Americans who say they want politicians debating birth control: less than 1%

The GOP has chosen a disastrously bad strategy on this one. This is what we call an "unforced error" in sports.

Dude, you do it all the time in other threads. It is about a pattern in how you argue. You, and other liberals, always play the race card. That is why it makes people upset. That is why people commented. You meant it as a joke? Fine. I was not trying to start a conversation about it again. I was just explaining to Kralizec that my entry into this thread was more focused on something other than the main point of the thread, and that I came in at the half-way part. Please, enough whining about being whined at already.

[Lemur]

I think that a side effect of this policy is that it does infringe on peoples' freedom of conscience without sufficient reason.

I think reproductive health is sufficient reason, and the fact that we are men discussing whether or not women should have access to cheap/subsidized birth control has a certain delicious irony, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

Your points are fair and fairly made, but we disagree on this fundamental. I think choosing when to begin a family is basic to a woman's health. (Leaving aside the 14% of women who take the pill for hormonal or other health reason.)

You, and other liberals, always play the race card. [...] Please, enough whining about being whined at already.

You want to call me out as a race-baiter? You and the four other Orgahs who bandwagoned like you were lining up for cocaine in a 70s disco? Try again. And please, try harder. By incessantly whining and crying about a two-day old post (which was edited, a fact utterly lost on you), and prissing about how it reveals the hidden race-baiting agenda of EVERY LEFTIST EVAR, you parade your intellectual barrenness for all to see. Let's put it this way: If rhetorical or substantive content were required to get a woman pregnant, your posts would be completely safe. No birth control required. "Gelded" is the word that springs to mind.

You don't even have the courtesy to come back at me with anything clever. That's just rude, that is.

-edit-

In a way, I think this is a lovely analogy for the whole birth control debate. You grabbed what you thought was a safety rope, but it was actually a downed electric line. And now you don't understand why your shirt is on fire and your hair is smoking.

And now I promise this is the last time I will respond to the plaintive cries of the oh-so-offended rightwingers on this subject in this thread. At least, until someone has the testicular fortitude to come at me with substance, humor or style. I don't anticipate that happening.

[a completely inoffensive name]

This is what happens when an unsubstantiated argument is presented by someone, it is dropped and replaced when someone else points out how flawed it is.

[Vuk]

You want to call me out as a race-baiter? You and the four other Orgahs who bandwagoned like you were lining up for cocaine in a 70s disco? Try again. And please, try harder. By incessantly whining and crying about a two-day old post (which was edited, a fact utterly lost on you), and prissing about how it reveals the hidden race-baiting agenda of EVERY LEFTIST EVAR, you parade your intellectual barrenness for all to see. Let's put it this way: If rhetorical or substantive content were required to get a woman pregnant, your posts would be completely safe. No birth control required. "Gelded" is the word that springs to mind.

You don't even have the courtesy to come back at me with anything clever. That's just rude, that is.

-edit-

In a way, I think this is a lovely analogy for the whole birth control debate. You grabbed what you thought was a safety rope, but it was actually a downed electric line. And now you don't understand why your shirt is on fire and your hair is smoking.

And now I promise this is the last time I will respond to the plaintive cries of the oh-so-offended rightwingers on this subject in this thread. At least, until someone has the testicular fortitude to come at me with substance, humor or style. I don't anticipate that happening.

You are a race-baiter, and there have been many posts that prove it (not just the one in this thread you edited). You race-bait, then you cry "HELPZ! THEYZ ATTACKINGZ ME!"
If you are gonna play the race card, then at least stick to your guns. In other words, grow some balls.

And if you are going to deny that it is not a tactic widely employed by liberals, then you are either a blatant liar or smoking something really powerful. Either way, I think that if anyone believes you, it is only yourself.

Come back with something clever? Why? The truth is enough. I don't need to dress what I say up with humor or witticisms to hide its hollowness, unlike your honorable self.

Yes, I know, I grabbed the downed electric line and now the great power of Lemur will incinerate me! Get over yourself man. Your posts aren't half as witty as you seem to think they are, and they never were either.

You aren't gonna respond to me? Good, because to be honest, I am sick to heck of reading your boring posts. Have a nice day. :)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Someones mad.

[Rhyfelwyr]

One argument in this thread:

- find common points of agreement
- explore the nuances in each others points
- acknowledge where their arguments are coming from
- apologise for any harsh words

The other argument going on here:

RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE

[Vuk]

One argument in this thread:

- find common points of agreement
- explore the nuances in each others points
- acknowledge where their arguments are coming from
- apologise for any harsh words

The other argument going on here:

RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE RACE

Hardly, though Lemur tried his best. It is about hypocrisy and dishonest debating tactics.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Holy Christ Vuk, I'm here to learn from everyone. Pipe down and just leave it be. This topic interests me.

[PanzerJaeger]

Just like this thread, the debate surrounding this issue is now completely removed from reality. As usual, Rush has handed a political victory to the Democrats and completely shifted the focus of the debate to women's rights, which it was never about. Instead of standing up for religious freedom, the GOP is now perceived to be standing against long established women's rights and even women in general. For their part, Ms. Fluke and the Democrats are milking this for all it is worth. By not accepting Rush's apology, Ms. Fluke is seeking to prolong the bleeding and has transformed herself from a victim into a full-fledged political shill/women's rights icon. It's almost not even worth mentioning the rank hypocrisy in the Left's outrage as the damage has already been done. I cannot imagine a worse political outcome.

On principle, too, the Right got this wrong from the start. Lemur is largely correct. This is not an attack on religious freedom. What it is is another example of the kind of runaway entitlements and government overreach that have characterized this administration. Subsidized contraception may be a great thing and supported by many women's groups, but it goes beyond the Obamacare mandate and is emblematic of a government that is asleep at the fiscal wheel. Bridges are falling apart, schools are stuck in the 80's, our technological grid is falling behind many second world nations, and we cannot ask women to contribute even a dime to their own contraception? (It still has yet to be established whether men will share in this boondoggle.) This stuff can get very expensive beyond the pill.

Obamacare was sold as a measure to save Americans from unforeseen and catastrophic medical expenses. This ruling goes far beyond that premise. I suppose more emotional arguments about religious freedom or women's rights play better to the respective bases, but they are both missing the point in my opinion.

[Lemur]

By not accepting Rush's apology, Ms. Fluke is seeking to prolong the bleeding and has transformed herself from a victim into a full-fledged political shill/women's rights icon.

For what it's worth his apology was not an apology. "I chose two wrong words but I was right" doesn't begin to correct the evil of personally attacking a woman for three straight days, saying that she must be having so much sex it's a wonder she can walk. I can go pull quotes if you like, but some of them are not reprintable under Org rules. What the Rusbo offered was the thinnest possible level of self-justification and buttock-covering after he began to lose sponsors. I'm not going to speculate on Fluke's motives, 'cause I don't know her and have not read much about her, but calling her names for not accepting Rush's less-than-halfhearted apology is silly. If a national figure trashed you for three straight days and offered that sort of weaksauce, I doubt you would accept it either.

Subsidized contraception may be a great thing and supported by many women's groups, but it goes beyond the Obamacare mandate and is emblematic of a government that is asleep at the fiscal wheel. [...] This stuff can get very expensive beyond the pill.

This controversy has been specifically about the pill. And life doesn't really get expensive until you get into fertility therapy, which can go into the tens of thousands very quickly. Most insurance does not cover more than a fraction of that sort of thing; ask any couple that's trying (and failing) to conceive.

Again, I think basic reproductive health, such as the pill, falls well within the parameters of fundamental healthcare for women.

Moreover, I like the rate of abortion going down. I like teen pregnancy going down. I'm not terribly sympathetic to arguments—however well-intentioned—that would lead us down the path to increasing both of those numbers.

It's almost not even worth mentioning the rank hypocrisy in the Left's outrage as the damage has already been done.

I think Frum answered that one pretty well.

[Papewaio]

Separation of Church and State is good.

Separation of Corporations and State not so good. Yes little interference, jus not none. Government should be their to protect the individual from corporate excess.

A corporation ran by a religious group is not automatically a religious entity. A charity that does not ask for money for services would be the one that should be able to run along religious principles as long as it is fully self funded. A corporate entity that the consumer pays for goods and services should be run to the same rules regardless of the religious persuasion of the owner. To not do so is to violate the separation of church and state by either puttin unfair penalties on a religious owned company or by providing an unfair commercial advantage by removing obligations that other institutions have to perform under.

Equality for all religions. Equality for all corporations. Equality for all shareholders.

[Strike For The South]

Just like this thread, the debate surrounding this issue is now completely removed from reality. As usual, Rush has handed a political victory to the Democrats and completely shifted the focus of the debate to women's rights, which it was never about. Instead of standing up for religious freedom, the GOP is now perceived to be standing against long established women's rights and even women in general. For their part, Ms. Fluke and the Democrats are milking this for all it is worth. By not accepting Rush's apology, Ms. Fluke is seeking to prolong the bleeding and has transformed herself from a victim into a full-fledged political shill/women's rights icon. It's almost not even worth mentioning the rank hypocrisy in the Left's outrage as the damage has already been done. I cannot imagine a worse political outcome.

On principle, too, the Right got this wrong from the start. Lemur is largely correct. This is not an attack on religious freedom. What it is is another example of the kind of runaway entitlements and government overreach that have characterized this administration. Subsidized contraception may be a great thing and supported by many women's groups, but it goes beyond the Obamacare mandate and is emblematic of a government that is asleep at the fiscal wheel. Bridges are falling apart, schools are stuck in the 80's, our technological grid is falling behind many second world nations, and we cannot ask women to contribute even a dime to their own contraception? (It still has yet to be established whether men will share in this boondoggle.) This stuff can get very expensive beyond the pill.

Obamacare was sold as a measure to save Americans from unforeseen and catastrophic medical expenses. This ruling goes far beyond that premise. I suppose more emotional arguments about religious freedom or women's rights play better to the respective bases, but they are both missing the point in my opinion.

Affordable contraceptive is not government overreach. More safe sex= less unwanted babies. That's a good thing

[Centurion1]

Why are we ignoring the fact that contraception is incredibly affordable in this country already.

I don't consider Ms. Fluke a slut. I consider her a lying piece of crap. 3,000 dollars for contraception yearly? She is a pandering liar and I hold absolutely no pity for her.

Is she too good to go to organizations such as Planned Parenthood for her Birth Control.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why are we ignoring the fact that contraception is incredibly affordable in this country already.

I don't consider Ms. Fluke a slut. I consider her a lying piece of crap. 3,000 dollars for contraception yearly? She is a pandering liar and I hold absolutely no pity for her.

Is she too good to go to organizations such as Planned Parenthood for her Birth Control.

Clarify something for me. Does Planned Parenthood provide birth control pills or just condoms? If it is just condoms then you have to understand that many women are not going to put their trust into the random man to make sure she doesn't get pregnant.

[PanzerJaeger]

For what it's worth his apology was not an apology. "I chose two wrong words but I was right" doesn't begin to correct the evil of personally attacking a woman for three straight days, saying that she must be having so much sex it's a wonder she can walk. I can go pull quotes if you like, but some of them are not reprintable under Org rules. What the Rusbo offered was the thinnest possible level of self-justification and buttock-covering after he began to lose sponsors. I'm not going to speculate on Fluke's motives, 'cause I don't know her and have not read much about her, but calling her names for not accepting Rush's less-than-halfhearted apology is silly. If a national figure trashed you for three straight days and offered that sort of weaksauce, I doubt you would accept it either.

Rush wrote: "My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choice.” Ms. Fluke not only did not accept the apology, which is certainly justifiable, but is also making the rounds on TV to ensure everyone else knows that she is not accepting the apology - i.e., making hay. That's fine - Rush reaps what he sows, but it also confirms my suspicion that she was a Democratic shill from the start brought in to bolster Pelosi's hearing. The woman currently being portrayed as an innocent college student with the temerity to testify before congress only to be savaged by Rush is actually a 30 year old feminist activist with a long history of political advocacy. This has been a political circus from the start, and both sides are trying to outdo the other in righteous indignation and feigned outrage.

This controversy has been specifically about the pill.

I was under the impression that it was still unclear as to which contraceptive methods and procedures will be covered. We could even be responsible for voluntary tubal ligation, and all the associated hospital costs. Hopefully you have not had to spend any time in a hospital recently, but it is just about the most expensive hotel you can find in most towns.

Again, I think basic reproductive health, such as the pill, falls well within the parameters of fundamental healthcare for women.

Why? (Assuming we are excluding those that use it for medicinal purposes.)

Moreover, I like the rate of abortion going down. I like teen pregnancy going down. I'm not terribly sympathetic to arguments—however well-intentioned—that would lead us down the path to increasing both of those numbers.

This is a bit of a red herring. At-risk groups can be specifically targetted without subsidizing suburban housewives' vaginal rings.

I think Frum answered that one pretty well.

He did not. He ignored most of the examples cited in the article I linked to. The Left is clearly pushing for Limbaugh's termination while it remained largely silent during similar instances when the perpetrator was a liberal icon. As I said before, this has transformed from the genuine fallout over the stupid remarks of a radio talk show host to the political optics of feigned outrage. The Democrats will attempt to ride the women's rights wave as far as it will take them just as the GOP tried to do the same on the religious rights wave. This seems more like politics as usual rather than Frumm's 'new kind of low'. I don't think 'slut' is any worse than 'mashed up bag of meat with lipstick'.

[PanzerJaeger]

Affordable contraceptive is not government overreach. More safe sex= less unwanted babies. That's a good thing

Nothing you wrote has anything to do with completely subsidizing contraception for every woman in America. It is incredibly wasteful.