What if Mormons wanted polygamy again? Should we defer?

Ms. Bertram in her article titled, “Obama’a assault on Catholics is a threat to the rights of us all,” begins with the standard debaters’ tactic: defining your opponent in your own terms.

I don’t know anyone who has stated or will state that pregnancy is a disease. In my brief tome, I stated that “most doctors would agree that contraception falls within the realm of public health.”

It is the reason most women receive prenatal care and most women desire to have their babies born in hospitals under the care of a trained obstetrician. It is also the reason chemical contraception must be prescribed.

In the absence of modern medicine a significant number of women died in childbirth, not due to disease but because it was childbirth. Henry VIII’s wife, Jane Seymour, died in childbirth but she was not diseased.

As far as infertility being a “disease,” I have no idea where Ms. Bertram found that gem, except within the confines of her mind and the extremes of some radical religious viewpoint. For people who wish to conceive and cannot, it is a tragedy due perhaps to disease but most likely to some other reason.

My point about Catholics not adhering to the “revealed truths” concerning the church’s viewpoint on contraception is merely this: The bishops of the church can’t even sell this extraordinary viewpoint to their own flock.

But she is right if she believes this fact has little to do with the argument because what the church believes or doesn’t believe is not germane.

If and when this case goes to the Supreme Court, several judges will explore the precepts with hypotheticals. One might be this:

You speak of revealed truths. What if tomorrow, the head of the Mormon Church has a vision that the church was all wrong when it renounced polygamy in order for Utah to join the union? What if the revealed truth of the Mormon Church is now that polygamy is church doctrine and it is expected of every Mormon? Are we then to overturn 50 state laws outlawing polygamy?

What if the Jehovah’s Witnesses open hospitals but declare they will not pay for nor handle blood transfusions? What if Scientologists open hospitals and declare they will no longer pay for psychiatric care?

Where would Ms. Bertram like for me to stop? There are a lot of revealed truths out there. We are talking about public health and establishing some uniform system for public health.

As Ms. Bertram points out the Catholic Church is a major player. And to lower the tone of the argument to “someone else’s bedroom choices” when speaking about the availability of contraception so that a woman may in fact control her own choice of when she wishes to be pregnant is both Victorian (the age of men, the responsibility of women) and unrealistic.

The unreformed church overstepped its bounds in the early 16th century, the final straw being the sale of indulgences (purchased forgiveness for sins committed or to be committed) in Germany, the proceeds of which were to be used to rebuild St. Peter’s Cathedral.

A priest, one Martin Luther, loudly protested this earthly forgiveness sale. His protest gathered steam as did his vitriol and the Christian Church splintered and remains splintered.

The men who gathered to hammer out a Constitution in Philadelphia were keenly aware of this history and extremely suspicious of religion interfering in the duties of governance. Whether deists or skeptics, the major thinkers of the time understood the dangers of mixing the religious with the temporal.

I can only imagine John F. Kennedy trying to have this conversation when he ran for President. “I will not be dictated to by Rome; however, there are revealed truths and encyclicals I will consult now and then.”

President Obama was right to take this on at this time. If religious organizations cannot follow the law as relating to public health or any other law created for society which does not directly interfere with the personal practice of their religions, they should confine themselves to their core institutions where they may claim shelter.

The rest of us will not be dictated to by either a bishop in New York or the Bishop of Rome.

Timothy J. Parker

Peachtree City, Ga.

SocialButterfly88
SocialButterfly88's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2012
All women***

Listen ladies***

If they do actually take away our rights to birth control and abortion, I say we go on strike :) No sex! Then, what would they do?

2 things make this world go round: money and sex.

SocialButterfly88
SocialButterfly88's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/26/2012
Hmm..

Well if women are all sluts because we use birth control, then what does that make the unfunctional man that uses Viagra? I as a taxpayer do not want to pay for an old, unfunctional man to have sex. So if you take away birth control, then it's only right to take away viagra.

It's funny how men believe they have the right to dictate a woman's body, yet without it, they wouldn't have a use for Viagra now would they?

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Why should I care how many wives/husbands someone has?

Honestly, I don't see why it should bother me. I can't imagine wanting more than 1, but hey, maybe I'm missing the benefit.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
# of wives?

Maybe preparing for running against a candidate who so far has lived up to 'family values'. It shouldn't be an issue - but. . . . . There are obviously many like you who don't care about this, but I think it will become an issue in the election campaign. Sad.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Spy and Dm, it is not so much the number of wives Newt has

had, I would think it was much more important how cavalier he was in handling his break with those former wives. Shows a definite lack of character in my estimation. And, yes, I know his daughters are now saying all those allegations are not true but they are on his payroll now and raking in the big bucks, which by the way are being questioned by the powers that be. Money talks--and evidently helps to erase unpleasant memories in some cases. I wonder how many people noticed when one of his daughters was asked (I believe by Walters on The View) if they liked Calista, she skirted the issue by saying that Calista was doing a great job helping Newt on the campaign trail---

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Mytimite

Regarding the daughters answer on The View - you weren't the only one to notice that. Supportive of father is not a bad trait - but I agree regarding his attitude. The results of tonights voting will be interesting.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
I've never been real big on Presidential Elections..

The less those jokers in Washington do, the better off we all are.

askari
askari's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/17/2008
Jehovah’s Witnesses and blood transfusions

The question is not:
"What if the Jehovah’s Witnesses open hospitals but declare they will not pay for nor handle blood transfusions?"
but rather:
"How would the Jehovah's Witnesses react if the Federal government mandated that companies had to provide (and fund) free blood transfusions?"

The issue is not about others having access to something that is against your moral principles, it is the government mandating that you provide those same services or products to your employees at your expense.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
askari

Good point. There are other religions that have issues with healthcare mandates. The Second Day Adventists do not serve meat in their hospitals. Those who use their hospitals do abide by their dietary laws. By having another provider offer services in a religious institution to an employee that is not of that religion is the issue here. (And I think that is being worked out) The interesting point is there are members of some religions who don't abide by their religious dictates. (Catholics who use contraceptives; Second Day Adventists who eat meat, etc.) In our country, no religious institution should be mandated to provide a service against their religious belief. However, an individual has the freedom to make a decision regarding his/her own practice of their religion. IMO.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Cally Lou & fetility

At 22 Callista goes on the gov'ment House health care plan (better than any of us can afford). At 27 according to the divorce doc's she begins her affair w/ the Newtser @ 50. Now we can ass-u-me he is a fertile male because he had 2 from his 1st Baby Mama. The question could be would Cally Lou open her congressional medical records to reveal what prescriptions she was taking? I know several Catholic girls that woke up every morning w/ a headache & the "pill" was the only cure. Maybe they could share with all how the rhythm method actually works. The real question would be who is the actual "slut" and prostitute: A Georgetown law student or a concubine w/ a $500,000 Tiffany bill?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
bladderq & "The real question"

No, the real question is: WHO CARES?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
WHO CARES?

Men and women in this country who are tired of the use of words like 'slut'; 'prostitute' etc. to denigrate ANY WOMEN by anyone.

SPQR
SPQR's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/15/2007
the rule

If one or two well written and succinct paragraphs would suffice always try and lose your audience's attention with a lengthy homily

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
This Tuesday's Ballot

For the Repubs.....

MICHELE BACHMANN
NEWT GINGRICH
JON HUNTSMAN
GARY JOHNSON
RON PAUL
RICK PERRY
BUDDY ROEMER
MITT ROMNEY
RICK SANTORUM

For the Demos....

You know who....

Oh, and don't forget, Georgia law requires that each person voting must present one of the 6 pieces of photo identification.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
Cy & Voting

Hate to disappoint you but you'll only find 4 names on the (R) ballot: Gingrich, Paul, Romney, & Santorum---know it's tough but it's one of them or none!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Gym...That's what is showing...

on-line.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Diaper Act

Is dying on the vine. Referred to subcommittee and sits there. Don't worry. The Congresspeople who are fighting contraception/abortion, etc., instead of working harmoniously to get more jobs for their constituents won't have to worry about buying diapers for all the babies born because of the lack of contraceptives for MEN AND WOMEN. Geeez.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
D_Mom, on a somewhat related topic,

(not diapers but what goes in them,) did you read the bombastic, bubble boy, of right wing BS, Rush Limbaugh issued an apology for calling student Sandra Fluke a "slut" on his radio show?

Proving once again, principles be damned, when the sponsors walk, you change your talk.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Sponsors

Rush has alienated the women of the nation - let alone the Republican party. The apology is weak and unprincipled and his sponsors are RUNNING! WHAT ABOUT JOBS AND IMPROVING THE ECONOMY? How does calling a law student who uses a contraceptive a prostitute help jobs and the economy? Are condoms contraceptives? Are men who use them 'prostitutes'? Just asking. How did we get off the important subject of JOBS and start talking about women's reproductive organs? I respect the Catholic church for standing up for their principles and other religious organizations who may have difficulty with the first proposition of this issue. It is being dealt with - BUT NOT BY CALLING WOMEN WHO USE CONTRACEPTIVES PROSTITUTES!! IMHO.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Davids mom
Davids mom wrote:

WHAT ABOUT JOBS AND IMPROVING THE ECONOMY?

Yes, When is Obama going to do something that will address this issue other than taxing and spending more money by handing it over to the SEIU and 'investing' it in failed enterprises like Solyndra and the Chevy Volt? What's taking him so long?

Davids mom wrote:

Are condoms contraceptives?

Why, yes they are.
However, Obama's new mandate does not apply to men, only to the whores and prostitutes that have decided that someone else should pay for their sexual activity.

Davids mom wrote:

How did we get off the important subject of JOBS and start talking about women's reproductive organs?

Obama and the Democrats decided to make this an issue in order to take peoples mind off of his dismal, pathetic performance as POTUS.

What this woman was proposing, gaining some sort of financial benefit for having sex, is prostitution. Plain and simple. Limbaugh was right and did not need to apologize.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Just look at the charts

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/glance.htm

To distract citizens from the slow recovery after a devastating economy- we are discussing contraception? For women, contraception is a health issue. When you have a so-called intelligent gentleman from Georgia state that women who use contraceptives are whores and prostitutes (grizz) - well thanks for sharing. There is nothing more to be said. Have a nice day grizz. Maybe when leaders work together to tackle the deficit, continue the growth in jobs and economy, care for our veterans who are returning home to foreclosure and extensive medical bills - maybe then we can rise above calling women who use contraceptives whores and prostitutes. To brag about this as a Republican stance is very telling. I don't think the Tea Party wants this attached to their policies. Maybe grizz is appealing to a third party group. Most will see this as the ignorant statement of an individual, supported by others who are ignorant. This is NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE - but grizz and his ilk want to make it one. Interesting. I know, I know - it's all Obama's fault!!!

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Let's talk politics, Davids mom

Allow me to preface this by stating that is was the Obama administration that brought the contraceptive issue to the forefront in order to distract America from Obama's dismal performance as President. It began with that sniveling little dwarf Stephanopolis, who is bought and paid for by the DNC, made it an issue during the Republican debates. He took an non-issue and decided to make it an issue and no one took the bait.

What to do? Next, the libs decide to trot out this trollup Fluke and have her make a straw man out of nothing.

You want to talk politics? O.k. let's talk politics.

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why did new home sales in the United States hit a brand new all-time record low during 2011?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why are there 6 million less jobs in America today than there were before the recession started?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why is the average duration of unemployment in this country close to an all-time record high?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why has the number of homeless female veterans more than doubled?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why has the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 3 million since this time last year and by more than 14 million since Barack Obama entered the White House?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why has the number of children living in poverty in America risen for four years in a row?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why is the percentage of Americans living in "extreme poverty" at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why is the Federal Housing Administration on the verge of a financial collapse?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why do only 23 percent of American companies plan to hire more employees in 2012?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why has the number of self-employed Americans fallen by more than 2 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why did an all-time record low percentage of U.S. teens have a job last summer?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why does median household income keep declining? Overall, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% since December 2007 once you account for inflation.

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why has the number of Americans living below the poverty line increased by 10 million since 2006?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why is the average age of a vehicle in America now sitting at an all-time high?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why are 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida currently sitting vacant?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why are 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 living with their parents?

If the economy is getting better as Obama claims, then why does the number of "long-term unemployed workers" stay so high? When Barack Obama first took office, the number of "long-term unemployed workers" in the United States was approximately 2.6 million. Today, that number is sitting at 5.6 million.

Answer those questions, Davids mom.

The era of great prosperity that America has enjoyed for so long is coming to an end.

In fact, our long-term economic decline is about to accelerate.

So enjoy this "bubble of hope" while you can, because it won't last long.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
grizz

See GORT: Enjoy the GOP show. As of today hundreds of thousands of women and men who find those who agree or support Rush an abomination to American politics. The American people are saying ANYONE who supports denigrating any woman in the manner of Rush, Mahr, or whomever - is not going to be tolerated. Why are you defending this action? (A rhetorical question) I'm through with this topic. Just going to watch you guys try to stop Romney - and in the process giving Obama all he needs to win! Thanks!

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Just as I thought

No surprise there Davids mom. You couldn't answer a single question.
You have no interest in discussing things that matter to the American people.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Grizz, be patient, whoever wins the GOP primary

will get the answers to all those questions kicked down their throat during the first debate with President Obama. It will be on TV everywhere.

Until then, let’s continue to enjoy the GOP primaries.

BTW, have you called any women you never met a slut today? You slacker, RWM and SLindsey are whipping you bear boy. They probably won't let you ride the billie goat at the next Teaparty rally.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
gorty

Obama has no answers. Only excuses and blame. Enjoy it while you can, gorty-boy - Obama will be out of office in Jan 2013.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
grizz

Didn't you think that McCain and Palin would win? Just asking.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
No billy goat for you!

No billy goat for you!

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Gort, maybe Rush had overdosed on some of those prescription

drugs or maybe his housekeeper hadn't come back with the latest stash when he made the comment. Amazing how someone who lives in a glass house feels perfectly fine throwing stones. Too bad this wasn't 'the good old days' or that girl's daddy could have called old Rush Baby out to a good old fashioned duel for besmirching his daughter's name.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Slander

There may be a law suit in the future. You assist your daughter in college and law school - and some nut who disagrees with her regarding women's right to have control over their body - calls her a prostitute! If I were her parent - I would be in consultation with my attorney! Rush and his sponsors are considered 'deep pockets'. Maybe this will connect his brain to his mouth! (I know, the operative word here is 'brain' - is there one?)

Veritas
Veritas's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/23/2010
Mymite and DM ... No grounds

And where was all this outrage and calls for liable when Bill Maher was making his sexist ... Filthy and foul comments toward female conservative candidates (especially towards Bachman And Palin ... A fan of either I am not)
Selective outrage..,hmmm
Just say'n

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
veritas

I understand. I don't remember Maher calling either a whore or a prostitute because they used contraceptives. Not selective - just feel that to call a young women a whore or a prostitute because she advocates for women who use contraceptives is uncalled for. - Just say'n. IMO

Veritas
Veritas's picture
Offline
Joined: 06/23/2010
Maher

Called both women that and more just because he didn't agree with their political views...I am in agreement such actions are reprehensible by BOTH sides
My wise grandfather always said " people will always talk and say things about one another but it should never upset you unless its true"

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Any man who calls any woman a slut or a prostitute because of

their beliefs are less than a man, I don't care what that man's political leaning might be. Is Rush a prostitute because he used his insurance coverage to get his many prescription drugs and was his maid his pimp? Rush says and does anything to get a rise out of people but he sure did back down when it hit his pocketbook, didn't he? Now there is a man of conviction---if he felt he was right why would he back down because of the loss of a few sponsors or even his program?--because he is a money grubbing twerp and will say anything to stir a controversy.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
veritas

Your grandfather was a wise man. Rush is not. . .nor is Mahr.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
David's Mom, I sure hope that girl and her family do sue him. I

am not in favor of frivolous law suits but this was so uncalled for. It is time someone brought him up short. Maybe if the sponsor's lose enough money they will restrain him somewhat. He is nothing but a lot of hot air anyway.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
I hope she sues Rush as well, Moms

A lawsuit would be great. A good old fashioned libel suit with the defense being the truth. Rush would set forth his argument that this girl was receiving something of value from the government for the sole purpose of having recreational sex. That makes her a prostitute and the government her pimp. Their libel case is shredded right there, but a lawsuit would force people like Sabilius and Jarrett (if she is still there) to answer direct questions about what aspect of existing law makes this providing of birth control devices mandatory. They would actually have to answer questions like that with complete sentences instead of 5 second sound bites. And in a court, attempt to divert attention to STD's or women's health or her "right to choose" would be properly judged irrelevant to this particular case. Might even get the judge to lock up Valerie Jarrett for contempt if she persists with that nonsense.

Of course Rush's attorneys would chew them up and spit them out and the little tramp and her single mom know this and have probably already been turned down by attorneys who wouldn't take on that lawsuit on a contingency basis. If Andrew Breitbart hadn't been killed by the Dems (hard to prove, but I suspect it) he would figure out a way to quietly fund the girl's lawsuit just to get the whole drama on the world stage right before the election.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Mr. Morgan

Some questions. Do you have a daughter? Should men remove condoms if and when they engage in recreational sex? Hmmmm. Is this the most relevant conversation we should be having at a time when our country is recovering from a devastating recession/depression? Is this a distraction (supposedly) from the fact that the economy is slowly improving? What is this preoccupation with Valerie Jarrett? She is certainly still here - and I notice your Cooper has toned down his rhetoric. You are an interesting writer with quite an imagination. Are you writing a book?

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
2 daughters, not writing a book, just converting to dark side

I am trying to become a Democrat before the next election so that if Obama wins I won't be left out in the cold. I can get with program where I don't have to worry about house or car payments and I will certainly accept free condoms from my insurance company. You sure they are free? Doesn't seem possile somehow.

My effort to become a Democrat is moving right along. I am learning to tell the big lie, I can simply make up facts about the slut's mom being single. I can turn a deaf ear to facts that are inconvenient to my argument and I can rename things to mean the opposite of what they actually are.I can also just change the subject when someone on the other side tries to debate me using logic and historical facts. How am I doing so far?

And no mom, to answer another of your questions (seriously just this once) No this stuff about government-supplied condoms forced upon the Catholic Church and the insurance companies is not relevant or important as opposed to the economy. Prezbo brought it up as a distraction from his pitiful performance as President hoping to get the Republican candidates to overreact. It worked. I see Valerie Jarrett's errrr, hand in that as well.

BTW, neither of my daughters (1 being a lawyer, but we still love her) would go on TV and troll for free unmarried birth control. And if Obama actually called her, she would hang up on him. So I guess I'll be a Democrat with sensible, working, productive, law abiding (the other is a police detective) Republicans as daughters.

I woud still like to see a slander/libel suit against Rush. The tramp and her Mom would be gored and the witness list a dream come true for Rush. It would be like when NBC fired Imus and then tried to get out of paying him. Funny stuff.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Hey, RWM...

...my car just crapped out last week and I'd like to get some better $$ for it...oh, no 'Cash-for-Clunkers' for me? Wow, that sucks...

Hey, this administration is trying to get a national home loan modification program started since the banks aren't playing well; it hopes to get refi's down to a little over 5%. Since I've been paying 5.14% for the last 10 years, can I get mine reduced too, or am I just screwed because I paid on a mortgage I could afford?

I didn't have the greatest of upbringing, and that's not fair. I'm entitled to some kind of compensation from the government so I can 'play by the same rules' as the successful people here in America.

Oh, and my house needs new carpet...does the government have a program for that I could take advantage of? Does the carpet industry have a stimulus package?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Morgan
Quote:

The tramp and her Mom

Please stay with the political party you're with. The Democrats don't want you!

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Robert Morgan, I know you are trying to be funny and come off

as intelligent at the same time. I must say you miss the mark by a mile. Any father, regardless of what his own daughters have accomplished, who goes around calling someone else's daughter a slut and worse leaves a lot to be desired as a man. Regardless of what your daughters have accomplished and how lily white their morals may be there is always the chance that someone else sees them in a different light. As for free birth control, if I am not mistaken, this lady is asking that her insurance (which she pays for) cover birth control. Regardless of what your feelings on the subject of a catholic school's insurance including or excluding birth control, you and Rush are both showing what inflated boors you are.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/18/2007
MYTMITE & The wannabe moocher

My reading tells me this woman is a 30 yr old activist. Who would take out an insurance policy without making sure it covered what you wanted? I think ElRushbo's intention was to point out that the govt should not pay for or mandate that someone else pay for contraception--seeing as it's a personal decision to use or not to use then it is a personal responsibility to assume financial responsibility too, should one choose to use it. Access is not an issue--payment is. Regardless, he chose wrong words to try and make his point--rude & crude for sure. Here's what I'll bet you; if she's a smoker, I bet she finds $$ to buy smokes; I'll bet you she finds $$ to have a cell phone. No matter, Rush was wrong. Oh, and there is some doubt about the veracity of her testimony.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
AHG, do you think insurance companies should pay for Viagra

for men? It certainly isn't needed to save someone's life. Maybe the men who feel the need can go to that same store that was suggested women go to for their sex toys to indulge themselves instead of using contraceptives and having regular sex. Of course, men make most of the rules so the deck is probably stacked in their favor but I must say it might be embarassing but I never heard of a man dying from having a 'wet noodle'.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Did she or did she not pay for her insurance? I do not believe

the government is involved in this in any way, shape or form as far as supplying or not supplying contraceptives. If I am not mistaken she wanted her paid for insurance to cover contraceptives. I could not care less if she got coverage or not, even though her wanting her insurance is no diffent than me wanting my dental insurance to cover yearly visits to the dentist. Again, since for some reason no one is getting this point----I do not in any way, shape or form care one way or another regarding the insurance issue--my revulsion here is with Rush and the few males on this site that decided to tar this woman with the dirty brush of foul names--slut and prostitute. How would any of them like their daughters to be branded with such titles because of a statement she made regarding contraceptives or any other subject? Case closed.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
I haven't followed the story but

I think it would be like anything else....either they pay or don't. At my age, I wish they would cover plastic surgery....but they don't.

For many many years my insurance at Delta didn't cover laiser surgery even though the down time was much less than traditional surgery. I didn't like it, but that was the way it was.

I should read up on this.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
No mytmite, the slut did not pay for insurance

and that is the real issue. This doxie is asking that the government pay for her recreational sex by supplying condoms, pills, whatever to her at no cost because she needs to have sex for recreation - not procreation.

She is not interested in paying insurance premiums to a private insurance company which may not cover the condoms or the pills, instead she and many other mindless liberals think the birth control stuff should be given to her free of any charge courtesy of the US Government. This is part of Obamacare where the government pays for everything and you don't pay a dime for your abortion, condoms or birth control.

Of course when the government starts paying for your sex life, they own you. Then they may demand more from you. Like aborting inappropiate childen - retarded, mixed race, deformed. Maybe a 1 child per family policy. Ever think of that?

Do you not read girl?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Not all women agree with the uhhhh.... 30 year old "Lady"

"I’m a proud Georgetown woman upset about another Georgetown woman who may have no pride at all. How else do you explain - Ms. Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown Law student, now famous for testimony she never gave – jumping up to talk about her sex life (with the House Minority Leader and with the liberal media) and ask for the cost of her sex life to be subsidized by other students at a Jesuit School?"

"Sandra Fluke doesn’t speak for me. Or for Georgetown.
She doesn’t speak for those of us who worked hard to be able to choose to come to a great institution with a great tradition of faith and scholarship. She certainly can’t speak for the Jesuits who dedicated their lives to God and Education with a long established set of rules. There are only ten of them, and Ms. Fluke would do well to give them a quick read.
If she wants a more liberal sex life, she can go to Syracuse. (Syracuse, I must apologize – but we are in March and basketball matters – sorry you got caught up in this.)
Sandra doesn’t even speak for all skanks! She only speaks for the skanks who don’t want to take responsibility for their choices. That’s a tiny group of people. Hey Sandra! How about next Saturday night, you come hang out with me and my gay boyfriends! Your hair will look fabulous and you’ll get to see great musical theatre! Oh, and odds of you getting pregnant? Zero percent." Angelia Morabito Georgetown Student

btw-Where was all this "outrage" when Sarah Palin was called a whore and Michele Bachman was called a "Bitch" and worse.. Seems like Hypocrisy is the word of the day around here.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
First of all, it has been a long long time since I have been a

girl. And, yes, I do read; probably a lot more than you. What makes you think that your facts are any more accurate than those procured by anyone else? You continue to show just what a closed mind you have. Regardless of anything else involved in this situation, I still find it reprehensible that a man who says he is a father of two daughters would stoop to calling someone else's child a slut, prostitute or even your new word "doxie". Are you sure you are aware of everything your daughters have done during their lives? I doubt it--so beware of those words you bandy around so readily.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
From Wikipedia

If this account is incorrect - please give us the correct account. Too many versions have been expressed here.

Quote:

On February 16, 2012, Representative Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, held a hearing on infringement of religious liberty and contraceptive mandates. Fluke was submitted as a witness by Democratic members, but Issa denied her testimony, stating her name was submitted too late. The hearing was widely criticized for having no women witnesses to speak on an issue of contraception.[8] She was later[9] invited to testify on February 23 for House Democratic members.[10]
In her testimony, she argued in favor of requiring private insurance companies to cover contraception. She claimed that over the three years as a law student, birth control would cost an estimated $3,000. She continued that the lack of coverage would force many low income women to go without contraception and that women's free health clinics cannot meet the need. She then discussed the consequence of such policies, including a friend with polycystic ovary syndrome being forced to go without birth control pills, resulting in a cyst developing on her ovaries. According to Fluke, her friend was denied coverage, even with a verified condition from her doctor, and this is not a rare event for women with medical conditions. She then stated that she wanted equal treatment for women's health issues and did not see the issue as a being against the Catholic Church.[11]
[edit]Rush Limbaugh Controversy with Fluke
Main article: Limbaugh–Fluke flap
On February 29, 2012, in rebuttal to Fluke's testimony, conservative pundit Rush Limbaugh berated Fluke on his radio show, resulting in a loss of some advertising support, and an eventual apology from Limbaugh.[12][13][14] Limbaugh said that Fluke and women who use contraception want to "be paid for having sex", asking, "what does that make them? Sluts? Prostitutes?" The next day, he insinuated that Fluke and women like her are "having so much sex that they need more birth control pills", a charge that has been vilified by many in the media because only one contraceptive pill per day is required to keep a woman from getting pregnant. Limbaugh also said that Fluke's parents should be ashamed of her. Limbaugh continued to verbally assault Fluke for several days, making inflammatory statements until he apologized, claiming that his intent was to make a point with absurdity and not to offend the woman.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
"birth control would cost an estimated $3,000."

"She claimed that over the three years as a law student, birth control would cost an estimated $3,000."

This little liberal whore wants other people to pay because she is sexually promiscuous. That's the whole point. She wants other people to pay for her to be able to have protected sex. That makes her a prostitute.

Interesting how the Obama administration is so quick to mandate contraceptives, yet they don't mandate something like eye care that is really needed.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Your interpretation/not what she said (grizz)
Quote:

She claimed that over the three years as a law student, birth control would cost an estimated $3,000. She continued that the lack of coverage would force many low income women to go without contraception and that women's free health clinics cannot meet the need

Participants in a discussion should share an opinion - but there is no need to misquote in this discussion. Everyone here has the ability to interpret the written word. The lawyer is advocating for low income women - not herself. However - it's interesting to see what some individuals will do to make political points. Any candidate needs the women's vote in this country. Not a very smart move of Rush - but he found it entertaining - just lost some bucks - and he's prostituting himself by apologizing. Interesting turn of events.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
DM-Ms Fluke
Quote:

The lawyer is advocating for low income women - not herself.

The video I watched of Ms Fluke stated that she was a 3rd year law student. Not a lawyer advocating for anybody. And she used the term "women like me" so I think she is talking about herself. Now having said that, Russ Limbaugh could have made his point without resorting to name calling. But we all know that Limbaugh is over the top. To me how much sex this person has is none of my business. Unless she wants me to pay for it. I'm already, as a taxpayer, helping to educate her. I don't want to have to pay for her entertainment also. Not even if I get to see her sex tapes like Russ advocated.

Still the point could be made for the other side that in the case of low income women if we don't pay for contraceptives for these people we'll have to pay for their kids. In the real world there aren't many easy answers. Still I'm tired of the government taking my money to correct the willing mistakes of others. So I say she is attractive enough that most men would be happy to pay for her birth control if she were willing to select one man to be with. If she can't do that then I say she's on her own. Just like I am.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
G35 Dude

Too many interpretations of what she said or meant. G35, women don't take contraceptives only to prevent pregnancy It is a health issue for many women. This is a point that many are missing. Anyway - quite a distraction from Iran, job recovery, (the Pavilion is busier than I've seen it in a long time) - and it was just reported that at the latest poll, 45% of white Americans were thinking of voting for Obama. Interesting. (Someone mentioned that I haven't mentioned race in a long time - :-)

You're right! Just didn't get from her words that she was asking for contraceptives so that she could personally have as much sex as she wanted for free. (The members of the committee didn't get that interpretation either

Quote:

Sandra Kay Fluke (born April 17, 1981) is an American law student and women's rights activist[1][2] enrolled at Georgetown University Law Center[3][4][5] who spoke before Democratic members of the House of Representatives on why she believed free contraception is generally essential

.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
David's mom
Davids mom wrote:

(the Pavilion is busier than I've seen it in a long time)

Hold the presses!! David's mom saw that the Pavilion is busier than she has seen it in a long time; ergo, the economy is improving!! All those extra cars in the Pavillion parking lot are from the drug traffickers and from the thugs and shoplifters from Clayton/Fulton county here to rob and steal because they can't find a job in the Obamo-conomy.

The mandate that the STRUMPET Fluke was advocating applies to all women regardless of income or the reason that they are requesting it, so your argument is moot.

Trouble is, the welfare mothers and moochers that should be taking contaceptives won't because they want to have as many babies as they can.
They breed like rabbits and don't care who the daddy is because their new daddy is the U.S. gubmint. The more babies they have, the bigger the welfare check and the more food stamps they receive. Who needs a job when you can just pump out a bunch of illegitimate chillens? Eh, David's Mom?

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
From a few statements from some bloggers it is a shame that

their mothers did not take advantage of contraceptives. Or maybe after having the child, that they were not taught to show respect to others. I was always taught that relying on name calling or foul language was a sign of ignorance of the language. Guess Mom was right as usual.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
grizz

Why don't you visit the Pavilion during the lunch hour. (I'm assuming you have an 8-5 job) (Silly me) It's too bad that you feel that all of the customers in the Pavilion are drug dealers, etc. (That would make the majority of the 'drug dealers' white) . The customers that I see in the Pavilion are residents of Fayetteville, the majority 'white', and courteous, well-mannered, and friendly. On Sunday, many are church goers enjoying a lunch after the church hour. PLEASE STAY OUT OF THE PAVILION GRIZZ - you would be out of place! (I take back my invitation)

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Facts or not

It seems some rely only on what a 'commentator' says instead of checking the facts. The commentator, who is entertaining to some, is more interesting. Having insurance to cover health care is NOT FOR FREE. We pay for the insurance - but those who are part of a large organization can pool their money and get a reduced rate. Many had their health care covered in their job benefit. Lost the job; lost health care. Government, the people, pooling their resources, can cut the cost of health care for the individual. Oops -

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Civil Discourse
PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
MYTIMITE - I believe

the issue here is called freedom. If the insurance companies want to provide birth control to their customers they should be free to do so. The fact is that they are forced by government to provide a service that they may not want to provide, is called coercion through force of law. A law that is patently unconstitutional.

Maybe, you don't believe in freedom MYTMITE?

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
PTC, I did not say that I thought insurance companies or the

catholic based schools/churches etc, should or should not provide coverage. What I objected to is any man being low enough to call a woman filthy names because she stood up for what she believed. I think that too should come under the heading of freedom. Any man who resorts to calling any woman slut or prostitute has no respect for women, regardless of what they may say. We already know what Rush Limbaugh is--a windbag, ready to 'prostitute' himself verbally for the all mighty dollar. Remember when he was so holier than thou about drugs and druggies when all the time he was using his money and position to keep himself in all the pharmaceuticals he wanted to feed his habit. Sure changed his tune when he got caught didn't he? Just as he backed down and apologized to Ms. Fluke when he faced losing some of those big bucks. Rush makes his stupid statements for money, I cannot understand why some men on this site feel they have the right to denigrate some woman they do not even know. Having an opposing view should not give anyone the right to question someone else's morals with no proof.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
MYTMITE - Well

if you feel this strongly, then I would find out who sponsors him and write a letter to them, stop buying their products, and then generally ignore Mr. Limbaugh. He has no significance in your life.

I would not suggest that most men on this board believe that what Mr. Limbaugh said or will say represents their views. If they do, then ignore them as well.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Insurance companies?

I thought it was the church that was complaining. When did the insurance companies complain? I thought the Republicans jumped on the band wagon claiming Obama was anti-religion and taking away religious freedom. Gosh, it's hard to keep up with the 'right' reaction. Freedom. An interesting concept - seems there is still a difference between a male and female concept of the word. Hmmmmm.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Yes

insurance companies that happen to represent churches. Some church institutions are self insured.

Look DM, let's don't try to make this more than it is, it's not about male and female or religion. It's about the freedom to run a business the way you want to run it. It has nothing to do with "civil rights", it has to do with free enterprise and freedom to offer whatever service you chose to offer. The argument that there are those that work for religious institutions that won't receive contraceptives is a red herring. There are many people that work for many companies where insured services aren't provided. For example, many health care plans, I would say most, don't offer plastic surgery service reimbursements.

Now if plastic surgery is really really important to me, I have several options, I can pay for it myself, or take out a special insurance policy, or just find another job where the company benefit plan covers plastic surgery.

No Mom, this is all about freedom male or female and a law that forces individuals to buy something they don't want if they want health insurance. Unconstitutional law.

Or don't you believe in freedom DM?

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
PTCO - No

This isn't about your hypothetical entrepreneur out running his insurance company and the bad old government infringing on his freedom to run his business like he wants.

There are over 200 insurance mandates requiring insurance companies to provide substance abuse treatment, contraception, in vitro fertilization, maternity services, prescription drugs, smoking cessation, mental health services, access to healthcare providers other than physicians such as acupuncturists, chiropractors, nurse midwives, occupational therapists, social workers, mandates on treatment by insurance companies of dependent children, adopted children, it goes on.

In return, every one of these insurance companies is guaranteed by the state. These guarantees by the state insure the insurance companies and guarantee the insurance company's annuities and life insurance policies sold to the public.

This is not anything like a free market nor have I ever heard the insurance companies advocate the state stop providing guarantees for their products. It is perfectly legitimate for the government to mandate to companies that the government insures.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
JeffC - Well

Well Jeff, see Cyclist's response below, but while we're at it let's analyze your statements a bit.

"In return, every one of these insurance companies is guaranteed by the state."......"This is not anything like a free market..."..."It is perfectly legitimate for the government to mandate to companies that the government insures."

So, Jeff I assume you don't see anything wrong with this line of thinking?

If so, then you don't believe in freedom Jeff and you are a product of your environment.

The fact is Jeff that there are a lot of companies and people that enjoy the fruits of government largess (neo-capitalists) through regulation, laws, acts, guarantees, etc. I believe your candidate will be reaping some of the rewards of this perverse political process running up to the election. Mr. Obama is fund raising over the next week or so on Wall Street, read banks, surprise, surprise! He will raise more than $800 million for his campaign. Just where do you suppose all that money comes from Jeff?

Let's not pretend to be naive about this Jeff. You being part of this system should know better than most on how it works. The government sets the rules that benefit the few at the expense of the many. This is what happens when government gets caught up in and uses markets to further its aim of increasing power for narrow self-interests. The only answer is to reduce its size and return it to its intended purpose. And yes, I am not naive enough to believe that this can happen anytime soon. Power, after all, is not given up willingly except by men of honor and self sacrifice. There is no George Washington in today's world Jeff. However facts are stubborn things and so are principles. Both seem in short supply these days.

Back to the original point, with the passage of the Affordable Health Care Act, we will see another round of political payoffs and corruption. I can say this will absolute certainty. I can also state with certainty, that if government wasn't in health care at all HC would be more affordable, serve the widest population, be less inflationary, and be of higher quality than we have today. Oh yes, we would also be freer than we are today to run our lives as we wish without government complicating our lives.

Read history Jeff and learn from it or just ignore it, it doesn't matter to me. Start with "We hold these Truths to be self evident....."

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Well PTCO

Your pure laissez-faire capitalism has been gone for a hundred and fifty years. Insurance companies threw in with the government in 1774 when Lloyd's was founded. The backing of the government allowed bigger projects to be under written. This is a good thing. You can wax nostalgic about the loss of capitalist freedom but in the real world, insurance companies are never going to be unregulated because both sides like it this way and it's better for society.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
JeffC - Nice

dodge and weave there Jeff. "Pure" laissez-faire capitalism has never existed and never will but to a degree we had it here in the United States. It built the strongest nation on earth and until the turn of the 19th Century it was among the freest. The issue is about freedom, not the way things are but the way things should be. It's about the fundamental truths as the foundation of government. Its stated role in society through the Constitution and what is accepted as its role today are two entirely separate things.

The fact is Jeff our government is slowly eating way at the heart and soul of individual freedom, and we as a people are accepting it as the answer to our fears. It is the government that we should fear, the ultimate outcome will be despotism.

"There are two sorts of tyranny: a real one, which consists in the violence of the government, and one of opinion, which is felt when those who govern establish things that run counter to a nation’s way of thinking" - Montesquieu

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
JeffC - Mandates

I believe those mandates that you referring to are specific only to policies written for US government employees and not to the general population. Im not aware of a CFR that has a scope that you mention.

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Mandates Cyclist

Here is a list from the Libertarian Party of 45 mandates required by insurance companies in Georgia:

Georgia's 45 Health Insurance Mandates

It's more than I listed.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

You know what - this (contraceptives and insurance) is being worked out by leaders and civilly.) Freedom of expression is a freedom - and I expressed disgust at an entertainer calling a young lawyer a prostitute/slut because she has the ability to express her self civilly while advocating for a what she considers important. I have insurance that pays partially for contraceptives. I DON'T HAVE TO BUY CONTRACEPTIVES. but I appreciate being able to have reduced health care because of my insurance plan. I chose my plan; Obama's health care plan will not change my coverage. . . .but if for some reason I lose my coverage, I will still be able to get health care at a reduced rate. AGAIN - I DON'T HAVE TO BUY CONTRACEPTIVES.. . OR DO YOU. but I have the freedom to purchase it if I desire to. The cost of a contraceptive will not change the cost of health insurance PTCO. Have a nice day. I'm continuing to enjoy my freedom.

Quote:

insurance companies that happen to represent churches. Some church institutions are self insured.

The Catholic Church and other religious groups have worked this out - it's the 'right wing loonies' that have taken this to an uncivil level. . .all in the name of politics - not business.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
So, DM

I suggest that the issue is freedom, you suggest? Well I don't know what you suggest, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Thanks.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Interesting argument, are you

Interesting argument, are you saying, any woman that receives something of value after having sex is a prostitute?

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Prostitution defined

Definition of PROSTITUTION

1
: the act or practice of engaging in promiscuous sexual relations especially for money.

I think that would fit Mz. Flukes definition of what she was proposing.

buddy123
buddy123's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/05/2006
s. lindsey

you obviously did not hear or read what Ms Flukes statement was about, she was making an argument for having contraceptive included in the insurance plan she has through a catholic institution. She was not looking for any one to pay for free contraceptives.Rush was totally out of line.....and you sir if you are married and had sex before marriage, are guilty of solicitating a prostitute, after all she did get a ring out of it!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Buddy a question

Was she forced to work or forced to go to Georgetown?

No? Then why should an employer be forced to provide for a service free that is not otherwise covered when you negotiated your contract for employment or college?

Don't like what your College or employer offers... LEAVE.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
SLindsey, good point, when

SLindsey, good point, when she got hired she probably didn’t have much leverage to negotiate terms with her employer.

That’s why passing “card check” is so important. It will give employees more power to negotiate better term with their employer and protect them against retaliation.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Yep exactly what we need more Unions to screw things up

Every business needs to function like GM.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
Amen, Buddy 123

Evidently reading 101 was not included in some people's school program. It's amazing how people can skew things to fit their thinking. Wonder if any of their wives or daughters get contraceptives through their insurance program and if they do, what they condider that makes them?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SLindsey

So when a women uses a contraceptive - she is engaging in promiscuous sex. Interesting. Thanks for your enlightened input.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
No Dm but I don't expect anything else

coming from you.

It's about freedom of choice.. You like that right. You want the right to chose to abort a child right?

So why is it we are being given no choice rather I want to pay for her casual sex?

Tell you what you and mytmite pay for up for sex surrogates for the rest of us. After all it's only fair right?

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
So, SLindsey, are you in the need of a sex surrogate? Maybe you

would have done better to go to a school who's paid for policy offered contraceptives--obviating the need for a sex surrogate. See, I am making assumptions about you just as you and several others are making about Ms. Fluke. I am sure there are some insurance policies that do pay for sex surrogates---myself, I have never had the need to check into it.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
mytmite sure if you want to pay for it...

Maybe Mzzz. Fluke should have thought about that before she took the Public Assistance and went to a Jesuit School.

Sounds like very poor planning on her part. I mean if you want to be the Welfare Condom Queen maybe she should have gone somewhere else.

btw- Where were you on all of the Conservative women being called sluts, whores and bitches?

Sounds like selective outrage to me.

MYTMITE
MYTMITE's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/14/2008
SL, I do not get outraged about things--not good for your blood

pressure. I responded, on this site, to the men who chose to call a woman a prostitute, slut, skank, etc. If someone had posted on this site and called Republican women the same names I would have said the same things. It seems that there are people who post here who always have to put every situation in a political light. It is not right to call any woman filthy names, Democrat, Republican, Independent, whatever. Why is it so hard for all of you to see that I find it wrong for any man to call a woman such names? I have daughters, granddaughters and even great-granddaughters and I certainly would not tolerate anyone referring to them in this manner. I can't help but believe that any man who thinks this is acceptable has no regard or respect for women and any woman who accepts the fact that men call women these names has no self-respect. That is not a democratic view, not a republican view, independent view, religious view, agnostic view or atheistic view--just the view of a female who thinks it is wrong for someone to disparage a woman in this way for expressing her views. Does freedom of speech only apply to those considered to be of pristine character? If so, if we were honest, no one would be able to freely express a view.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Just saying mytmite...

You,DM and the MSM seem to be awful selective on what is outrageous to you.

This 30year old "lady" wants TAXPAYERS to fund her sex life. In return for that Rush calls her a slut and you go all apocalyptic over it.

Just wondered where I could find your's and DM comments on Ed Shultz when he called Laura Ingram a slut or Bill Maher's on HBO comment about Sarah Palin calling her a slutty Stewardess, or Chris Mathews calling Michele Bachmann a Bitch...

Just wondering...

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey
Quote:

This 30year old "lady" wants TAXPAYERS to fund her sex life. In return for that Rush calls her a slut and you go all apocalyptic over it.

Do you think the more you say this - it will become true? Read the facts. If you feel Mahr, Shultz, etc. are wrong - why do you think others will feel you are right to call someone's daughter a prostitute or slut? Just asking.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Just pointing out the Selective Outrage DM

Just saying is all....

***WARNING Explicit Commentary***** from the left.

Rush Limbaugh Isn’t the Only Media Misogynist

"Yes, it’s true. Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Bill Maher, Matt Taibbi, and Ed Schultz have been waging it for years with their misogynist outbursts. There have been boycotts by people on the left who are outraged that these guys still have jobs. Oh, wait. Sorry, that never happened.

Boycotts are reserved for people on the right like Rush Limbaugh, who finally apologized Saturday for calling a 30-year-old Georgetown Law student, Sandra Fluke, a “slut” after she testified before congress about contraception. Limbaugh’s apology was likely extracted to stop the departure of any more advertisers, who were rightly under pressure from liberal groups outraged by the comments."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology...

lion
lion's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/16/2005
Rush and Republicans

How can Republicans, especially those running for President, think they are strong enough to govern the mightiest military power on earth and oppose nations like Iran when they are afraid to stand up to Rush Limbaugh? Rush makes these "leaders" look like a bunch of wimps.

bladderq
bladderq's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/02/2005
Mama Bush today

I had to love Barbara Bush today (mind you I like her and Daddy Bush but there is no place in the new Repug party for the likes of them). She claims this is worst election cycle she has seen but what role did her clan play in the roots of such? Who brought Lee Atwater to life and upon his stoole did spawn Karl Rove? This made me think of politics in the last 40 years and the operatives. You have Nixon w/ Halderman / Erichman and dirty tricks. You have Carter w/ Ham Jordon / Powell. You have RAYguns-Bush w/ Atwater to Rove. Clinton w/ Carvile (love that guy). Back to Duby Bush & Rove. Now, who ran the nastiest campaigns?