First world problem: I wanna rawdog this slut, but Obama won’t pay for the pig to get on the pill.
I just like that the same people who oppose abortion oppose contraception
The most disturbing part to me is the name calling from the GOP. I would be just as appalled (and have been) with either party behaving like this but I expect more from my elected officials. If I wanted to hear name calling and degrading remarks to back someones argument I would hang out at the food court at the mall or something.
I basically agree with jnky on the actual situation.
So why is this girl complaining to a democratic committee? Shouldn’t she be complaining to the Church for not believing in modern technology and using ancient methodology? Isn’t the separation of church and state the main issue here, where as the government can’t govern the church’s beliefs?
I think birth control used as a medication rather than contraception should be covered.
Oh the ironing
Also, rush limbaugh said some seriously messed up shit about this girl. What gives that junkie scumbag the right to call her a prostitute?
this whole discussion is seriously infuriating. so let me get this straight -
- conservitives dont want to make insurance companies offer free birth control because its either against their (THEIR is the key word, sometimes the religious right forget there are other religions than the one where child fucking is condoned) faith, or they dont believe in public assistance at all
- conservitives dont want to pay for welfare when someone without a job pops out 7 kids because theyre poor and cant afford birth control
seems reasonable
Somehow I managed to buy rubbers or not have sex and don’t have 7 kids, what are these people doing wrong? College’s have free condoms on campus… want the pill? Ante up.
^^^You managed to skip a key thing they want… PEOPLE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS!
It seems the name calling works both ways. Most people are capable of logic and reasoning, but few want to go through the hassle.
This person is allowed to state their opinion and why they support it just as much as somebody else is allowed to state their disagreements and why. I personally think she makes a compelling argument, but the real issue here is if a so-called “private” institution has a right to determine a level of care. So, while her argument provides cases, they might not be relevant. Here are my questions. Some of them may be irrelevant, but I’d like to hear the opinions of others.
- The institution likely requires health care, either private or through the institution. Is the individual allowed to decline coverage and seek coverage that meets their requirements elsewhere? This is likely the case, does it discriminate against a certain group of people (either intentional or unintentional)? Does it matter? quesiton 2…
- By choosing to attend a school, does the person also accept the rules and regulations? Were they made clear to them before they started to attend?
- Georgetown likely receives a significant amount of tax payer money (money for research, loans and grants for students to attend their school). Does the federal government have a right to determine a level of care if they send federal money to an institution? Is there already a precedent for this? If the institution disagrees with a policy, can they continue their policies and not accept federal money? Is there a way for a private institution to seek a waiver even if they want to accept federal money? Does this even matter… (question 2)
I fear big government mandating these sorts of things to private institutions, and I’m not sure if individuals (students) are being forced into coverage. I’m also not sure if Georgetown is a completely private entity and represents a true private institution. In other words, this may be a really bad example.
The big issue for birth control used to treat other ailments is that in most cases the FDA has not approved it for that use. So it has to be prescribed for birth control even though that is not the main intent of it. If tomorrow there were drugs that specifically treated these outlier maladies but did not provide birth control you would still have people crowing about the whole thing
This issue is just plain stupid.
Religion causes so many fucking problems in the world.
For what? It’s not it’s real.
I’m not going to bash people who think there’s an invisible man in the sky that makes all your problems go away if you’re a good enough person but lets you get cancer and suffer horribly until you become a disfigured mutant then wither away and die instead. I’m just going to think that they’re absolute morons in my head… No reason to say it out loud.
Oh wait…
everyone is fucked.
free birth control for all.
but seriously, there A LOT more reasons for women to take birth control than just to prevent pregnancy. and if you disagree, or you “don’t understand”, it’s because you have a penis and you can fuck off.
Women are objects #fact
As much as I am an atheist I’d never give up the freedom of religion. Just simply keep it to yourself.
Ooh I missed this? Self important bump:
So it’s 2012 and we’re still talking about birth control? Just fucking cover it and move on.
Or why stop there? Don’t cover diabetes medicine because their fat asses won’t put down the bagels? Don’t cover injuries because fucking clumsy motherfuckers should have looked before they fell down? Health insurance definitely shouldn’t cover cancer medicine for smokers or drinkers. Those fuckers dug their own graves. And you know what? Most of you probably haven’t taken the time to geek out on health research, but I’ve already learned that grains and dairy lay the inflammatory foundation for most western diseases, so I don’t want my money to cover MS or Arthritis medicine for you fuckers that choose to shove bagels and bran muffins down your throats every morning.
Or we can just all get our beliefs out of medicine and let chicks have sex with a lower risk of pregnancy and you can eat your cream cheesed bagels and grain fed meat and get NSAIDS and insulin to reduce your risk of heart attack.
If you’re going to argue against tax money covering medicine that can be avoided through low risk behavior all I ask is that you apply it to everything, not just the one that a church has brainwashed you into thinking is bad.
I bet you didn’t even know that chicks stop taking the pill for one week a month and have a period purely to satisfy the Catholic church? It’s an enhanced “rythm method” which is the birth control method endorsed by the church. There’s no reason for chicks to have to continue to have periods. Studies of primitive tribes show that chicks pass puberty, get pregnant, breastfeed, get fertile again, and lather rinse and repeat for most of their lives and only naturally have like 50 periods in their lives, not hundreds like modern chicks.
This was a good one from me. Too bad it’s in politisuck and nobody will read it. 