Sandra Fluke Officially Working With Obama

[daveman]

Question.


If you needed a blood transfusion, but your employeer refused to allow your insurance to cover it, would you still be saying "pay for it yourself!" ?

Or if your employeer were, say ... Muslim and you needed a surgery where they wanted to use a pig valve and your employeer refused to allow the insurance to cover that... Still ok with that?

Are you REALLY equating the need for a blood transfusion and heart surgery to birth control?

Really?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

...or people could just not have sex until they can pay for their own preventive measures or until they're ready to have children.

It's called "personal responsibility". I understand it's a foreign concept to you.

Oh, so you have no fucking clue what birth control pills are, or how they're used?

Here's a quick primer:

1. Many women take these pills REGARDLESS OF HOW OFTEN THE FUCK so they can regulate very painful, often often debilitating menstrual issues. I'm sure most of the women you meet at the Early Birds special at the singles bar are all dried up down there, but many, many women take these pills outside the auspices of sex.

2. People fuck, Dave. I know you and your fellow Conservatives don't like to hear this, but regardless of all your hand-wringing and Jesus-fying, people still fuck. And the fuck a lot. They fuck so much that without birth control methods readily available, our population will skyrocket, which leads to rampant poverty, which leads to crime, etc. Population control is a GOOD thing.

3. It's not "personal responsibility" that you're preaching. It's trying to curb natural biological impulses in a completely impossible way. My parents are two of the most devout born-again Conservatives you'll ever meet. And when they were 17 they had sex out of wedlock ON PURPOSE to create a baby so they could go live with each other. They're still together now, by the way 40 years in December. So if we know people are going to do this shit, regardless of their upbringing, why not make the good, healthy, and productive means of stemming population growth available?

I know why...because you're old and out of touch.

Yeah. None of that explains why I should have to pay for your choices.

Of course, you have no answer to that, and will instead blather on with mindless profanities and pretend you've won.

Good luck with that.

You have to pay for my choices, because I have to pay for yours. It's how insurance works. It's how paying taxes works. We don't get handed a menu of services. We pay the bill. If you're okay with getting preferential treatment over women, that's fine, Lameman. Just admit it and be proud.

 

[Care4all]

I knew this would happen, but now it's official.

Sandra Fluke is working with the Obama campaign.

Say Anything Sandra Fluke To Campaign With Obama In Colorado » Say Anything

I'm sure Obama will hook her up with some brothers..
That will keep her busy....

I'm guessing he already hooked her up with a half-brother...just don't tell Mooshell.

GOSH you guys are low life scum of the earth Limbaughs aren't you....? and you probably think you are funny.... sheesh

 

[AmyNation]

Why would that be necessary? Simply allow individuals to purchase coverage that does not include birth control. That does not mean the employer has to provide such an odd policy. But why should I not be able to purchase such a policy if I can find one? You would permit it for an employer.

Why birth control and not any of the other mandated coverage?

Excellent question. I think that would be a good idea. Now, why would you allow an employer to exempt such coverage, but you would not afford the same liberty to an employee?

I think it would be nice for large coroprations to offer employees a religious insurance option, that would cover the needs for all dominations "no birth control, no blood transfusions, no std/aids care" etc etc.

However there is no way to make insurance pools for small businesses work if every employee gets to decide what coverage for other people they are willing to pay for.

 

[AmyNation]

Question.


If you needed a blood transfusion, but your employeer refused to allow your insurance to cover it, would you still be saying "pay for it yourself!" ?

Or if your employeer were, say ... Muslim and you needed a surgery where they wanted to use a pig valve and your employeer refused to allow the insurance to cover that... Still ok with that?

Are you REALLY equating the need for a blood transfusion and heart surgery to birth control?

Really?

What I am equating is one religions person health opinions with another.

Birth control, btw, can be just as vital and life saving as blood transfusions.

 

[freedombecki]

Why do so many wingnuts hate women?

Why does everyone hate you redskins?

Because we scalp stupid people for the shear fun of it.

 

[Too Tall]

she's already paying for her health insurance premium, why should she have to pay added costs when mr. viagra doesn't have to pay added costs, mr prostate cancer doesn't have to pay added costs, mr heart disease doesn't have to pay added costs, or mr vasectomy doesn't have to pay added costs, or mr veneral disease doesn't have to pay added costs or have to go buy those services somewhere else.

MOST women on birth control ARE MARRIED btw...

Many men have to pay Viagra out of pocket, because it is not covered under their policy. Seems like women are just as capable.

Except those men are using it EXCLUSIVELY to fuck, while most women take BC pills for something other than birth control.

Failing is what you do best.

I am sure you have a link to prove that.

 

[Too Tall]

Why birth control and not any of the other mandated coverage?

Excellent question. I think that would be a good idea. Now, why would you allow an employer to exempt such coverage, but you would not afford the same liberty to an employee?

I think it would be nice for large coroprations to offer employees a religious insurance option, that would cover the needs for all dominations "no birth control, no blood transfusions, no std/aids care" etc etc.

However there is no way to make insurance pools for small businesses work if every employee gets to decide what coverage for other people they are willing to pay for.

I have often wondered why women who have had a tubal libation or are post menopause can't have the cost of pregnancy removed from their health insurance policy.

 

[daveman]

And if they choose to go with one that DOESN'T cover contraceptives?

And you would have a point if the employer went to the dr. or hospital to make them refuse to give you birth control...

Not offering to pay for something in compensation for whatever reason is not stopping you from your own choices in your medical treatment, for you can go into your little wallet and pay for it yourself.... and they are not stopping you from buying different or extra insurance, all on your own

Or, conversely, we can take everyone out of the woman's bedroom except for herself and her sexual partner, and just tell Health Insurance companies that they need to stop treating women's health issues different than men's health issues.

Thanks for proving my point, dipshit!

As the interviewer in the video Stephanie posted asked:

"So you want government out of the bedroom. Why do you want government to pay for what goes on in the bedroom?"

None of those asked could think of a reason. You wanna give it a shot?

 

[AmyNation]

Many men have to pay Viagra out of pocket, because it is not covered under their policy. Seems like women are just as capable.

Except those men are using it EXCLUSIVELY to fuck, while most women take BC pills for something other than birth control.

Failing is what you do best.

I am sure you have a link to prove that.

How an Unscrupulous Birth Control Policy Cost One Woman Her Ovary | Faith in Public Life


Here's one link, google will give you plenty to choose from, all saying upwards of 55% of women use birth control to treat medical issues.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

Many men have to pay Viagra out of pocket, because it is not covered under their policy. Seems like women are just as capable.

Except those men are using it EXCLUSIVELY to fuck, while most women take BC pills for something other than birth control.

Failing is what you do best.

I am sure you have a link to prove that.

Sorry, should have been more clear: Most don't take them JUST for fucking/preventing pregnancy:

Many American Women Use Birth Control Pills for Noncontraceptive Reasons

The most common reason U.S. women use oral contraceptive pills is to prevent pregnancy, but 14% of pill users—1.5 million women—rely on them exclusively for noncontraceptive purposes. The study documenting this finding, “Beyond Birth Control: The Overlooked Benefits of Oral Contraceptive Pills,” by Rachel K. Jones of the Guttmacher Institute, also found that more than half (58%) of all pill users rely on the method, at least in part, for purposes other than pregnancy prevention—meaning that only 42% use the pill exclusively for contraceptive reasons.

 

[AmyNation]

Excellent question. I think that would be a good idea. Now, why would you allow an employer to exempt such coverage, but you would not afford the same liberty to an employee?

I think it would be nice for large coroprations to offer employees a religious insurance option, that would cover the needs for all dominations "no birth control, no blood transfusions, no std/aids care" etc etc.

However there is no way to make insurance pools for small businesses work if every employee gets to decide what coverage for other people they are willing to pay for.

I have often wondered why women who have had a tubal libation or are post menopause can't have the cost of pregnancy removed from their health insurance policy.

Shared cost makes it cheaper for everyone.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

And you would have a point if the employer went to the dr. or hospital to make them refuse to give you birth control...

Not offering to pay for something in compensation for whatever reason is not stopping you from your own choices in your medical treatment, for you can go into your little wallet and pay for it yourself.... and they are not stopping you from buying different or extra insurance, all on your own

Or, conversely, we can take everyone out of the woman's bedroom except for herself and her sexual partner, and just tell Health Insurance companies that they need to stop treating women's health issues different than men's health issues.

Thanks for proving my point, dipshit!

As the interviewer in the video Stephanie posted asked:

"So you want government out of the bedroom. Why do you want government to pay for what goes on in the bedroom?"

None of those asked could think of a reason. You wanna give it a shot?

Sure, I can answer that.

Because you're asking the question based on a false presumption that all "bedroom intrusion" is equal. It's not. When progressives say we want the government out of our bedrooms, we're asking that they not legislate what can or can't be done between two consenting adults. You know, like not passing laws making blowjobs illegal, or two dudes fucking illegal, etc.

The birth control policy isn't about sexual activity. It's about health. It's about not having unlimited resources to take care of every baby ever born. It's kind of sad that in 2012 we're still having to convince old, white people that birth control is a good thing. Unwanted pregnancies lead to overpopulation and more welfare babies. Also, more babies in orphanages, etc.

It's both silly and impractical to say "just stop fucking" as a means of controlling population. Population control is a very real and very necessary means to keep your country from things like massive famine, and outbreaks of disease.

In short, making sure that women have no reason to not at least have birth control as an option makes sense for EVRYONE. Making sure two dudes who like to fuck each other can't get married only makes sense for the people who believe in fairy tale mythologies about invisible forces guiding their destiny.

Does that answer your question, fuck nut? Of course it does, but you'll sputter some bullshit response. And I will know I won.

 

[daveman]

This debate reminds me a lot of the "drug testing welfare recipients" debate. It feels right, "druggies shouldn't get welfare!", so people disreguard the cost to the government.

So you want me to pay for someone's illegal drug habit, too?

You're awfully generous with other people's money.

 

[ConservaDerrps]

This debate reminds me a lot of the "drug testing welfare recipients" debate. It feels right, "druggies shouldn't get welfare!", so people disreguard the cost to the government.

So you want me to pay for someone's illegal drug habit, too?

You're awfully generous with other people's money.

Actually, dumb fuck, those tests have been proven to be wasteful expenditures.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/no-savings-found-in-florida-welfare-drug-tests.html

So you're the one being generous with other people's money, since you have to compensate people who pass the drug test.

Whoops! There goes ol' facts and truth, fucking up Conservative dogma again...

 

[daveman]

How stupid can you get....

Who here does not pay a dime towards their own health insurance? If I hel;p pay for my health insurance then I should get a say in what coverage I get, and women should have health care coverage for reproductive services....

Why should us women have to pay for vasectomies for men? It's not my vasectomy....but I still have to help pay for it....

Why should women have to pay for Viagra for men....? I don't get to take it, I don't get the hardon, I don't get the pleasure for some other guy's viagra?

Why should I have to pay for someone else's Diabetics medicine? I don't have the disease.....? Why should I pay for another woman's baby....I've never had a baby, why should my insurance costs include these?

I don't have heart trouble, why should I have to pay for someone elses heart attack?


blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah and blah....


What a bunch of bunk

Do you object to, say, dog fighting?

Should you be forced to underwrite that?

I'm going to assume you said "no".

Okay -- so why should a company be forced to underwrite actions it views as morally objectionable?

 

[ConservaDerrps]

How stupid can you get....

Who here does not pay a dime towards their own health insurance? If I hel;p pay for my health insurance then I should get a say in what coverage I get, and women should have health care coverage for reproductive services....

Why should us women have to pay for vasectomies for men? It's not my vasectomy....but I still have to help pay for it....

Why should women have to pay for Viagra for men....? I don't get to take it, I don't get the hardon, I don't get the pleasure for some other guy's viagra?

Why should I have to pay for someone else's Diabetics medicine? I don't have the disease.....? Why should I pay for another woman's baby....I've never had a baby, why should my insurance costs include these?

I don't have heart trouble, why should I have to pay for someone elses heart attack?


blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah and blah....


What a bunch of bunk

Do you object to, say, dog fighting?

Should you be forced to underwrite that?

I'm going to assume you said "no".

Okay -- so why should a company be forced to underwrite actions it views as morally objectionable?

Because it's false morality. That's why. We all know the Catholics are fucking retarded for their anti-birth control pill stance. No one has the balls to say it. But I will. The Catholics are fucking retarded for their stance on birth control.

 

[AmyNation]

This debate reminds me a lot of the "drug testing welfare recipients" debate. It feels right, "druggies shouldn't get welfare!", so people disreguard the cost to the government.

So you want me to pay for someone's illegal drug habit, too?

You're awfully generous with other people's money.

Did I miss where you were the only person in America who pays taxes? It's only your money? My tax dollars are collected by the tooth fairy?

 

[daveman]

All he did, was follow the advice of a panel of medical experts and add birth control to the list of other services that it's mandated insurance cover. I don't use all those services either, and yet I dont throw a hissy fit that I help pay for them.

Neither do I. But I understand why millions of people do. Because it offends their beliefs. And, the thought of forcing, upon penalty of an extra tax, every American to purchase birth control coverage, is very offensive to me.

Ok, that is a diffrent argument, and one I can understand.

I am for employers being able to opt out of controceptive coverage because of religious reasons.

...which is what Georgetown wanted to do. Fluke decided her needs/desires trumped Georgetown's moral beliefs.

Of course, she's spending something like $27K a year at G-town. Surely she can find 9 bucks a month in the couch cushions to buy her own pills.

“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy,” Fluke testified regarding the Catholic university's policy of not covering birth control. “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.”

But Fluke's testimony was very misleading. Birth control pills can be purchased for as low as $9 per month at a pharmacy near Georgetown's campus. According to an employee at the pharmacy in Washington, D.C.'s Target store, the pharmacy sells birth control pills--the generic versions of Ortho Tri-Cyclen and Ortho-Cyclen--for $9 per month. "That's the price without insurance," the Target employee said. Nine dollars is less than the price of two beers at a Georgetown bar.​

 

[daveman]

Oh, so you have no fucking clue what birth control pills are, or how they're used?

Here's a quick primer:

1. Many women take these pills REGARDLESS OF HOW OFTEN THE FUCK so they can regulate very painful, often often debilitating menstrual issues. I'm sure most of the women you meet at the Early Birds special at the singles bar are all dried up down there, but many, many women take these pills outside the auspices of sex.

2. People fuck, Dave. I know you and your fellow Conservatives don't like to hear this, but regardless of all your hand-wringing and Jesus-fying, people still fuck. And the fuck a lot. They fuck so much that without birth control methods readily available, our population will skyrocket, which leads to rampant poverty, which leads to crime, etc. Population control is a GOOD thing.

3. It's not "personal responsibility" that you're preaching. It's trying to curb natural biological impulses in a completely impossible way. My parents are two of the most devout born-again Conservatives you'll ever meet. And when they were 17 they had sex out of wedlock ON PURPOSE to create a baby so they could go live with each other. They're still together now, by the way 40 years in December. So if we know people are going to do this shit, regardless of their upbringing, why not make the good, healthy, and productive means of stemming population growth available?

I know why...because you're old and out of touch.

Yeah. None of that explains why I should have to pay for your choices.

Of course, you have no answer to that, and will instead blather on with mindless profanities and pretend you've won.

Good luck with that.

You have to pay for my choices, because I have to pay for yours. It's how insurance works. It's how paying taxes works. We don't get handed a menu of services. We pay the bill. If you're okay with getting preferential treatment over women, that's fine, Lameman. Just admit it and be proud.

Since my insurance provider covers contraception, I'm really not seeing how I get preferential treatment.

But even when we were struggling the hardest financially, we could have sprung for 9 bucks a month.