Pro-life vid of day: TIME Person of Year finalist – Sandra Fluke?
by LauraLoo
In their infinite wisdom, TIME has bestowed to Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke (aka martyr of the women’s movement and BC-dependent liberal at taxpayers’ expense) the honor of being a finalist for “Person of the Year.”
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGBFKghsfsE[/youtube]
Is this a joke?
Additional thoughts about this nominee from LifeNews and Breitbart. What are your thoughts?
Email dailyvid@jillstanek.com with your video suggestions.
[HT: 89 WLS Chicago]
Dec.03, 2012 12:00 pm |
Video of the day |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Let’s see. We have a 14y/o Pakistani girl who takes a bullet to the head for advocating education for girls. We have a female Mexican mayor who defied the drug cartels, survived two assassination attempts, and was finally found mutilated in a ditch.
We have such women of conviction, courage, and sacrifice but “The Time Person of the Year”? A snivelling, whiney American woman with her hand stuck out.
Uh Sandra, check out Walmart where you can get a bargain on your pills, your biggest sacrifice will be giving up a couple cups of Starbuck’s to pay for them. Or maybe Sandra’s millionaire boyfriend, with whom the “struggling” Ms. Fluck has enjoyed international vacations, could be put upon to buy a box of condoms.
My sincere apologies to the women in the first paragraph, the one who is dead and the one fighting for her life, and their families that I would even mention their very courageous loved ones in the same post as this overindulged whiner.
YES MARY!!
Thank you!
The voting so far for Fluke
33% yes
67% no
Well put, Mary.
Although a meaningless Time prize would bookend nicely with the now-meaningless international prize that our president was given after he won the election. ‘Cuz, y’know, he’s accomplished so very much in his life. Lookie here kids, everybody gets a gold star just for showin’ up!!
I liked the crack: “If you opened up the door for an old lady, or anybody for that matter, this year you are more qualified to be person of the year than Sandra Fluke.”
This guy has the chops to be a comedian. He did it so straight face.
I think Time did ths to annoy people.
This is as meaningless as the Nobel Peace Prize has become. Obama got the Peace Prize, then droned innocents to smithereens. And besides, Time’s Person of the Year thingy has lost my respect long ago. Last year was the “protestor.” It’s not even a person.
Lame.
Boy, I miss this guy’s videos. I used to watch them all the time on RightWingNews. I’ve got to revisit my favorite blogs. This is numero uno, but there is a lot of good stuff on the interwebs. ;)
A well deserved honor. Sandra represented the vast number of younger women who are being alienated and limited in their opportunities by elements whose aim is the curtailment of womens freedom. The vilification she received from certain people demonstrated the need for people like her to stand strong.
Heeellooo Tyler. I returned, I responded. As I said I would. What happened to you? :-)
Reality,
Oh Puh-leeeze. Reality, have you no sense of embarassment? Talk about “vilification” to the 14y/o Pakistani girl with the bullet in her head or the surviving family members of the Mexican woman mayor who defied the drug cartels, survived 2 assassination attempts, and was found mutilated and dead in a ditch.
How exactly is Ms.Fluke being limited and alienated in her opportunities and who pray tell are these “elements’? The Taliban? The drug cartels?
Reality, your heroine could go to Walmart and get her pills for $4-$9/month and the most limitation she would suffer is sacrificing a couple cups of Starbucks.
When all else fails she could get her millionaire boyfriend to cough up a few bucks for some condoms.
Why don’t you check out my first post for REAL women of conviction, courage, and sacrifice, since it obvious your knowledge on this subject is severely limited.
I loved the comment made on OReilly….she would refuse the award unless Time comped her subscription….
Point of Correction: According to Sandra, her last name is pronounced ‘phluck’, as in pluck or puck.
I nominate ms Phluck for the No Belle Piece Prize.
Hi Mary. Yes, both the examples you give are strong, proud, heroic women. Whilst Sandra didn’t quite face a bullet in the head (mainly because one faith is about 500 years behind the other), both Sandra and the young Pakistani lady were resisting the tentacles of archaic, patriarchal thinking intent on restricting their freedoms and opportunities.
The poor woman Mayor in Mexico suffered at the hands of criminals, pure and simple. It had nothing to do with the archaic, partiarchal thinking represented in the other cases.
Realstupidity says: December 3, 2012 at 5:25 pm
“Sandra represented the vast number of younger women who are being alienated and limited in their opportunities by elements whose aim is the curtailment of womens freedom.”
As far as I am concerned Sandra and the vast number of helpless, whining, demanding, panhandling women she represents can ‘phluck’ themselves sillier.
Just don’t do it on my dime.
Your body, your choice, your responsibility, you pay.
Keep your uterus out of my wallet.
Reality,
LOL. Well at least you answered my question. You obviously have no sense of embarassment.
You haven’t told me in what ways Ms.Fluke’s freedom and opportunities have been restricted. Please, some specific examples.
As for the lady mayor of course, she only faced down the drug cartels and survived two assassination attempts. She did not face down the sinister forces of evil that Ms.Fluke does on a daily basis. BTW, who are they?
Ugh, how could someone who was famous for no good reason in the first place have their 15 minutes stretched out this much?
Come on Mary, don’t be so coy ;-)
If you know enough to say things like “A snivelling, whiney American woman with her hand stuck out” then you obviously already know the answer.
I have acknowledged that the lady mayor was a brave person who lost her life facing a criminal organisation.
I think you’ll find that more peoples lives are negatively impacted by the archaic, patriarchal structures in place across the world than by Mexican drug cartels.
“Keep your uterus out of my wallet” – straight after your church is out of mine.
When all else fails she could get her millionaire boyfriend to cough up a few bucks for some condoms.
If he isn’t willing to do that, maybe she could at least talk him into using an old sandwich Ziploc. She can find tons of free ones in any school dumpster and stash them under the seats of his Rolls Royce for quickie bar-time access.
Desperate women behaving desperately.
I really don’t care if health plans cover contraceptives. It would reduce the abortion rate though, so you guys might.
It would reduce the abortion rate though, so you guys might.
Who says? Fluke?
Reality,
Just answer my question. How has Ms Fluck’s freedom and opportunity been denied and by whom?
Yes, snivelling and whiney aptly describes someone who thinks the world owes them something, who has their hand stuck out, especially when its someone who can well afford to cover her own bills.
Yes I know, those ”archaic patriarchal” structures around the world make the drug cartels look like a bunch of choir boys.
Its obvious Reality you have no concept of what true women of courage really are.
“Desperate women behaving desperately.”
Wow! The trash talk continues and keeps bringing me back. When so-called Christians trash talk they really trash talk. Please, keep it up! I should be thanking you. This is the kind of stuff that turns undecided voters into Democrats.
Don’t forget to throw “slut” in there occasionally as well. After all, It was Rushbo’s use of the term that made her a national celebrity! Genius! Pure genius!
BWAHAHAHA!
So what you are saying Mary, is that you feel justified in saying the things you did about Sandra Fluke yet you don’t know anything about the situation. Is that it?
“Yes I know, those ”archaic patriarchal” structures around the world make the drug cartels look like a bunch of choir boys.” – well I wouldn’t call them choir boys, but they have a negative impact on less people.
Oh I think we mostly agree on what constitutes true women of courage. We just don’t agree on who some of them are.
mp,
Were you equally bothered by Bill Maher, who gave 1 million to the Obama campaign, calling conservative women t—s, and c—s? How about Bill Maher’s ridicule of Sarah Palin’s DS child?
Apparently Democrat congresswomen Jan Shahansky and Sheila Jackson-Lee, who refused to condemn Maher didn’t, and neither did Obama, who said nothing about returning the money.
Spare us your sanctimony.
“Spare us your sanctimony.”
I’m sorry, I just can’t resist because it’s all so entertaining.
Reality,
Just answer the questions I asked you. How have Ms. Fluke’s freedom and opportunity been infringed upon and by who? You made the claim, back it up.
Answer my questions and I may seriously reconsider my opinion that she is a snivelling whiner looking for a handout.
No we definitely do NOT agree on what constitutes true women of courage and who they are.
mp,
You’re not making sense…again.
I’ll take that as a yes then Mary :-)
“No we definitely do NOT agree on what constitutes true women of courage and who they are” – we agree on two out of three here.
Reality,
I only know of two. Still waiting for an answer.
“You’re not making sense…again.”
Mary, I wouldn’t expect you to understand!
:)
mp,
I’d worry if I could.
I don’t care one way or the other on Fluke – but the historical list is fascinating (up until recent years).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year
Meh, well i certainly think its a stretch to name Fluke as person of the year, I mean I can’t think of anything she has actually done. Had she actually wrote or proposed the HHS legislation I could at least see an argument for that, but not so much just for testifying.
That being said, its also unfair for paint her as a weak sniveling little girl. I don’t know how Georgetown is, but when I went to University they made us Buy university insurance, even if we had insurance through our parents, which everyone did. So we were essentially paying an extra $300 dollars a year for a redundant policy that covered nothing useful . That in addition to the 50k tuition that we and Fluke pay.
Sorry but there is absolutely positively nothing needy or cheap or whiney about wanting the school that takes FIFTY THOUSAND YEARLY from you and REQUIRES you to buy health insurance to cover the only prescription you take, birth control pills
If you have enough knowledge of the situation to justify your comment re Ms. Fluke Mary, then you already have the answer you seek, don’t you.
Yes, well I did say that we agree on two. Did you not get that?
Reality,
Still waiting for an answer.
You said we agree on two out of three. I only know of two women of courage. Did you not get that?
You are either admitting that you made the comment without being fully availed of the situation, or you already know who attempts to subjugate women. Which is it?
I actually know of a whole lot more than two women of courage. We agree on two of the three mentioned here.
Shannon,
Fluke chose to go there knowing it was a Catholic University. I go to a religious institution or am hired by a religous employer, then I agree to abide by their rules. It doesn’t mean I have to agree with or like them. We have something called a First Amendment in this country.
One could certainly argue that soap, hot water, toothpaste, toothbrushes, midol, asipirin, tampons, toilet paper, ”feminine hygiene products”,nasal spray, and exercise equipment are all essential to health, but I haven’t heard anyone argue that someone else is obligated to provide them to us.
Like most graduate students, as I once was, a little belt tightening might be in order.
However, Sandra could get her pills at wal-mart at a reduced cost by sacrificing little more than a few cups of Starbucks a month and could certainly hit up her millionaire boyfriend to cough up a few bucks for condoms.
My opinion of someone snivelling and whiney is someone who expects a handout. Also, compared to the true women of courage I mentioned, she’s a snivelling whiner, and I don’t mean to insult those women by mentioning them in the same post with her.
Reality,
Still waiting.
Apparently you have a problem with reading comprehension. I said I know of only two women of courage.
I’m still waiting too :-)
Really, you only know of two women of courage? That surprises me I must say. I know of many more. But yes, we do agree on two of the three mentioned here.
Reality,
I can only assume you can’t answer my question.
I am referring to the two women of courage I mentioned on this thread. Again Reality, you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension.
We both know that you already have the answer. You must have if you can justify your attitude towards Sandra Fluke.
Yes yes, you agree about two of the three mentioned on this thread. How many times do I need to say so!
Reality,
Still waiting.
You still have a problem with reading comprehension.
Oh I think it is you who has the problem. Not necessarily with reading comprehension but with justifying your comments re Sandra Fluke.
Reality,
Still waiting.
KTB:
LOL!
I nominate ms Phluck for the No Belle Piece Prize.
LL
Umm Mary, who’s asking for a “handout”? Sandra Fluke pays into a private insurance plan; why is it so unreasonable for Sandra, as a consumer, to expect this plan to cover a basic health service?
Hmm yes let’s paint Sandra Fluke out to be some king of welfare queen slut when, in a few short years, she’ll be making bank with that fancy degree and contributing a heck of a lot more to the economy than any of her detractors here.
BV,
Well, wouldn’t you agree soap, toothpaste, and toothbrushes are basic health needs? Should insurance cover these?
If Fluke wants to buy a policy that will pay for her birth control pills, be my guest. If the Catholic University she attends won’t provide such a policy, tough. Either go somewhere else or buy her own.
BV,
I’m sure her millionaire boyfriend contributes plenty. And if Fluke eats, wears clothes, drives a car or takes a bus, pays rent, and gets her hair done, then she is contributing to the economy.
BTW, I’m sure Fluke and her boyfriend’s international travels have done wonders for the economies of other countries.
Mary: It’s not the university’s place to dictate what kind of healthcare a student can obtain through private insurance.
BV,
The student doesn’t have to purchase the University’s insurance and in case you don’t know BV, we have something called a First Amendment. The Catholic or any religious institution can refuse to provide any “service’ that violates their religious conviction. Like the kosher buthcher who can refuse to sell non kosher meat or the Hindu grocer who can refuse to sell meat.
If the student wants to purchase their own contraception or insurance that provides it, go for it.
Me too.
Please, the University isn’t providing a service to anybody besides organizing a group of people together who then purchase the insurance themselves. Also, let’s not pretend that the university doesn’t benefit when its students and staff have insurance coverage.
This is not an act of altruism on the part of Georgetown.
BV,
The university can determine what services will be provided by that coverage since they contract with the insurance company. Whether the university benefits or not isn’t the issue.
Hmm yes let’s paint Sandra Fluke out to be some king of welfare queen slut when, in a few short years, she’ll be making bank with that fancy degree and contributing a heck of a lot more to the economy than any of her detractors here.
Well in that case she should have no problem buying her Ziplocs. No more dumpster diving for Fluke.
Prolife=prowoman, praxedes? What is it about a young, successful, smart AND sexually active girl who freaks you out so much? Regrets much????
Realstupidity says December 3, 2012 at 6:40 pm
“Keep your uterus out of my wallet” – straight after your church is out of mine.
The body of Christ is not demanding that the taxing power of the state be employed to subsidize our wine and wafer budget.
If you are going to demand equal treatment then it is time you ‘cowgirled up’ and paid your on way instead behaving like the helpless damsel in distress.
I nominate you for the Scarlett O’Harra “Oh whoa is me” award.
What is it about a young, successful, smart AND sexually active girl who freaks you out so much? Regrets much????
If she was so smart, she would be demanding accountability from the boy/men who are getting the milk for free, not from everyone else. I was once young, successful and sexually active and now I’m telling you I wasn’t at all smart when it came to this subject.
Allow me to be blunt: Reformed sluts are pretty good at picking out current ones.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/twitter-obama-puts-mark-over-mortgage-deduction-214730224–business.html
“Breaks for middle class impt for families & econ. if top rates don’t go up, danger that middle class deductions get hit – b o,” mr. bo-jangles said via Twitter.
Obama signs his initials – B O – to tweets that he writes himself.
Either that or the first dog, who is also named ‘b o’, is ‘tweeting’.
“Reformed sluts are pretty good at picking out current ones.”
I am obligated to point out that ‘slut’ is now a gender neutral term.
In that context I concurr with Praxedes perspective.
Meh, Sandra Fluke only really exists as a “public figure” because of the stupidity of Rush Limbaugh et al in attacking her personally rather than just articulating their opposition to the political beliefs she espoused. The strange obsession with calling her a slut has very little to do with the fact that she is either right or wrong that private companies should have no control over the insurance plans they offer.
FWIW I think she’s wrong but only because I think it’s ridiculous that companies and employers have ANY say over their employees’ healthcare options. It’s absurd to tie healthcare to a job – like, what an incongruous link to have artificially forged and just accept forevermore. Can you imagine if you had to get car insurance through your boss? if you couldn’t just choose the company and plan that was best for you but had to quit your job and find a new one and put your ability to drive at risk just to change your healthcare options? wtf? Sandra Fluke shouldn’t be able to demand that an educational or corporate institution offer an insurance plan that violates their beliefs, because that institution should not be controlling Sandra Fluke’s healthcare options in the first place. Just my $.02
It’s faster to just say “Man, what a slut!!” though. And it keeps her relevant when she is irrelevant, because it turns a political debate into an attack or defense of random people’s sexual habits, rendering all the “we don’t care what you do as long as you don’t make us pay for it” arguments moot and lending credence to the accusation that this IS about controlling and shaming women after all. Whatever. Not interested.
(*sigh*) I know I’ve been otherwise occupied, but may I gently remind everyone of an internet truism?
feed trolls –> trolls remain and multiply
trolls remain and multiply –> troll poo, all over the place
(troll poo = gleeful provocation of other contributors to anger, pointless running about in illogical circles, etc.)
Please don’t feed the trolls, eh?
Yes indeedy.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sandra-flukes-speech-at-the-sak-n-save-draws-10-people/
(*sigh*) I know I’ve been otherwise occupied, but may I gently remind everyone of an internet truism?
feed trolls –> trolls remain and multiply
trolls remain and multiply –> troll poo, all over the place
(troll poo = gleeful provocation of other contributors to anger, pointless running about in illogical circles, etc.)
Please don’t feed the trolls, eh?
I always thought it’d be a good idea to promote them to mods. Recently, my idea was acted upon. Goodie.
Xalisae wrote:
I always thought it’d be a good idea to promote them to mods. Recently, my idea was acted upon. Goodie.
(?!?) All right… I *must* be behind the times! What happened, exactly…?
Praxedes: so can we say the same for other medical expenses? If Sandra’s PRIVATE insurance–and not her partner–covers, say, a trip to the dermatologist or the emergency room, is he also “getting the milk for free”?
Mary and Prax,
I too don’t understand portraying Sandra Fluke as a welfare queen slut.
Nor do i understand how she wants a handout from Georgetown whom she pays 50k in tuition alone and pays for 100% of her insurance. None of the above are handouts.
If you don’t like birth control that’s ok. If you want to argue that insurance shouldn’t cover bc, argue it. COOL. But to pretend that Sandra was somehow out of line for arguing the opposite, is insane.
When students go to university, and the university does things they don’t like, they try to change them–its part of university culture and in fact the university encourages it. Georgetown wrote a letter in support of Fluke!
If Georgetown wants to deny Fluke her request, okay. But she had every reason to fight for it. The notion that students should be publicly shamed or denigrated for challenging an administration’s policy just because it is ‘religiously based–is to contradict the model higher education in America
Oh how I love you Xalisae.
Oh, very good xalisae! :-)
“The body of Christ is not demanding that the taxing power of the state be employed to subsidize our wine and wafer budget.” – actually, one way or another it is ken.
Shannon,
I didn’t portray her as a welfare queen slut. I said compared to a courageous schoolgirl who defied the Taliban and a woman mayor who faced down the drug cartels she is a snivelling whiner. I will not back down from that.
I have no issue with birth control like I have no issue with soap, hot water, tampons, and toilet paper. I just don’t think your insurance is obligated to provide it and you have no right to demand that they do. If a Catholic insitution, or any religious instituion contracts with an insurance company with the understanding certain services won’t be provided, its called religious freedom. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else.
Yes you can try to change what isn’t right, but you understand that people have their rights too, including religious freedom. We may not always agree with or like it. I may be very inconvenienced by the fact the local grocer won’t sell meat or pork because it violates his religious convictions. Tough.
For less than the cost of 2 cups of Starbucks, Fluke could purchase a month’s supply of pills at wal-mart of get her millionaire boyfriend to cough up.
We have become a nation of prostitutes and prostitution!! 1st Corinthians 6:16 And don’t you realize that if a man joins himself to a prostitute, he becomes one body with her? For the Scriptures say, “The two are united into one.” They have sold their souls. The worst of it is, we the taxpayers are now being forced to pay the price to sustain the prostitute lifestyle, which violates what I believe as a Christian. I never would have believed in my lifetime that such a day would come. Unbelievable. Men and women both have the responsibility to speak out and speak loudly. All the great religions of the world address this very issue, therefore, it violates the beliefs all faiths.
“If a Catholic insitution, or any religious instituion contracts with an insurance company with the understanding certain services won’t be provided, its called religious freedom.”
You’d have to totally convolute the meaning of “religious freedom” to apply it to this case, and also spit into the face of everybody who has truly faced religious persecution.
Also, people can obtain soap, hot water, and tampons through various county and state assistance programs. They should also be able to obtain birth control through insurance plans that they’re paying into (private, single payer, whatever). Family planning is a very basic form of health care.
It’s discriminatory against women to argue that birth control is a “frivolous” expense, since a) sex is an integral part of most adult relationships, and b) women bear a disproportionate amount of the burden of sex’s consequences. We know that lifestyle factors lead to diabetes but nobody on here is claiming that we shouldn’t pay for diabetes care. Why? Because diabetes has nothing to do with sex.
Sexphobia. Get over it.
Blue Velvet,
You don’t have to like the First Amendment and may consider it a huge inconvenience at times, but so far religious freedom exists and to some religions, birth control is forbidden, as meat or pork is to others.
Uh, BV, toothpaste, toothbrushes, soap, hot water, etc. are all basic forms of health care too, are they not? Are you being put upon when you buy your nasal spray and athlete foot powder? People buy basic health products all the time without whining that they are owed. Why shouldn’t insurance cover those items? Why shouldn’t insurance pay your monthly water bills and for your hot water heater so that you can keep yourself, your clothes and bedding, and your home clean? I would consider that a very basic health practice.
Furthermore, if insurance wants to pay for birth control and the woman wants to buy the policy, be my guest. I don’t know why birth control is any more an essential health need than anything else.
As I have pointed out BV, I have heard prices for pills at Wal-mart run from 4-9 dollars a month. I bet you pay more than that every month for water and electricity. Isn’t PP supposed to be such an important provider to low income women? Check them out. Shouldn’t the man have some responsibility? Also BV, who’s forcing the woman to have sex?
You need to get your medical facts straight BV. Lifetime factors don’t always lead to diabetes. Children can be diabetic. It depends on the type, genetic factors, etc.
Sexphobia. LOL. That’s right up there with “crypto-racial”. You never did tell me what “crypto-racial” means.
“I don’t know why birth control is any more an essential health need than anything else.”
Because it’s a routine part of most adult relationships and its health consequences can be enormous. Also true about the etiology of diabetes, but you can’t dance around the fact that many chronic conditions are the result of lifestyle factors that are conceivably just as “elective” as having sex.
“But so far religious freedom exists and to some religions, birth control is forbidden, as meat or pork is to others.”
Freedom of religious expression doesn’t mean being able to dictate what somebody else does with their property (which health insurance is).
I’m totally fine with freedom of expression. I don’t think anybody can demand that the Church start handing out condoms or ordaining women as priests. But for affiliated groups that a) receive taxpayer funding and b) employ individuals who might not adhere to the doctrine in its entirety (if at all), “freedom of expression” must be balanced against the freedom of the individual to own property and make his/her healthcare decisions.
BV,
The health consequences of not using soap and water or brushing your teeth can be enormous too. Did you know you can contract a fatal bacteria because of poor mouth hygiene?
BV, a business that you work for or a school you attend will have the right to expect that you conform to their rules. Your Hindu employer can forbid you to eat meat in his place of business. That does not infringe on your option and ability to go to the restaurant next door and have a hamburger. No one forces you to work for an employer or attend a certain school.
They can purchase insurance for their students or employees based on their religious principles, i.e. not allowing birth control or abortifacients. You do not have to partake of their insurance. If you can find an insurance company that will pay for your birth control, no one is stopping you from buying their policy or purchasing birth control with your own money.
“The health consequences of not using soap and water or brushing your teeth can be enormous too. Did you know you can contract a fatal bacteria because of poor mouth hygiene?”
Still waiting to hear your thoughts on treatments for chronic diseases that resulted in part through lifestyle choices. Eating a cheeseburger is entirely elective, no? Why should insurance have to cover insulin?
“BV, a business that you work for or a school you attend will have the right to expect that you conform to their rules.”
This is an issue of proximity. My Hindu employer might prohibit consumption of beef within his business, but you’re right–he can’t prevent me from using my wages to purchase a hamburger and eat it on the sidewalk in front of his business, no matter how much of an affront it would be to his religious sensibilities. Similarly, Georgetown can refuse to stock oral contraceptives in its student health pharmacy, but it shouldn’t be able to dictate what kind of private health insurance coverage people can receive on the (spurious) grounds of religious liberty.
But really, your hamburger scenario isn’t even analogous because it’s a heck of a lot more difficult to obtain health insurance as it is to buy a burger.
Blue Velvet,
Chronic health conditions have nothing to do with this discussion. We are discussing religious liberty and people taking responsibility for their sexual activity. BTW, insurance companies may very well charge more for or refuse to cover people with certain risk factors.
BV, the University does not dictate to the student what insurance to buy, understand? It offers insurance and the student can take it or leave it. Understand? Nothing stops the student from buying their own policy from an insurer who will cover BC. Understand? Nothing stops the student from spending their own money to buy their own BC. Understand? They can pop all the BC pills they want on the campus. Understand?
BV,
Actually my Hindu employer analogy is very sound. In both instances, the Hindu employer and the Catholic University, are exercising their First Amendment rights. So long as it is their business establishment/institution, they are fully within their rights to run them in accordance with their religious convictions. Going to the restaurant for lunch every day may be an added expense and inconvenience when just bringing a bologna sandwich and apple for lunch would suit you fine. Also, the religious institution is fully within their rights to purchase insurance for students that does not cover BC, abortifacients, or abortions.
In both instances it may be an inconvenience and added expense, but who is forcing you to work for the Hindu employer or attend the religious institution? Live with it BV, we have a First Amendment and we may at times be very inconvenienced by it.
“Chronic health conditions have nothing to do with this discussion.”
And why not? You disagree that contraception is basic health care; I’m merely subjecting other services to the same level of scrutiny.
“We are discussing religious liberty and people taking responsibility for their sexual activity.”
Right, so people should take responsibility for their health by eating better foods and exercising more. Less obesity=decreased healthcare costs.
“Nothing stops the student from spending their own money to buy their own BC. Understand?”
But Mary, they ARE spending their own money: on that health insurance plan. University-based health insurance exists in the first place because it’s recognized that many students often don’t have private insurance. It’s not as simple as going online to shop for a new plan if the university’s plan seems inadequate–people, especially young adults, simply don’t have that kind of flexibility when it comes to obtaining health insurance. Plus, at Georgetown, as with many universities, insurance coverage is mandatory; students are automatically enrolled in the university’s health plan unless they can furnish proof of outside coverage.
But even if health insurance were inexpensive and easy to obtain, religiously-affiliated institutions still aren’t justified in dictating what counts as a legitimate or acceptable healthcare expense on the grounds of “freedom of expression.” For one, these mandates aren’t being made with any reference to empirical fact or medicine (which is scary), and two, health insurance should really be the property of the individual actually paying for it. It’s a real stretch to claim that by allowing the insurance plan that it coordinates to cover birth control, the university’s somehow condoning its use. The next step would be to deny employees the right to purchase birth control with their wages. What’s the difference, functionally?
“So long as it is their business establishment/institution, they are fully within their rights to run them in accordance with their religious convictions.”
Within reason.
BV,
OK, then you agree that insurance should pay for soap, hot water, toothbrushes and toothpaste to promote good hygiene and exercise equipment to help control weight, right? It should also pay for vitamins and health food. What do you suppose all these essential health items cost students? Why are they any less essential than birth control?
The religious run institution has First Amendment rights. This isn’t Freedom of Expression BV, its Freedom of Religion and yes the institution that is purchasing the insurance is fully within its rights to dictate what that insurance will cover in accordance with their religioius beliefs.
I might be angry and inconvenienced that I can’t eat my bologna sandwich in the Hindu employers business establishment, and think it is absolute nonsense, but you know what? Tough crap. He is fully within his rights.
Just what part of “religious freedom” don’t you understand BV?
If the students have proof of other insurance. So they do have an option, right? How about just going to Walmart and paying 4-9 dollars for pills or getting condoms from PP? Don’t we hear how they provide such services?
We have a First Amendment BV. Get over it.
BV 8:25PM
Who determines what is within reason?
“OK, then you agree that insurance should pay for soap, hot water, toothbrushes and toothpaste to promote good hygiene and exercise equipment to help control weight, right?”
That’s a clever way to dodge my question. Presumably you’re opposed to family planning coverage because sex is an elective activity. It would follow that we should reconsider subsidizing other medical expenses that result from lifestyle choices. Why not? I know why: because breaking an arm during a rollerblading accident, or eating a lifetime’s worth of Big Macs, has nothing to do with that nasty old s-e-x. We get it: the tools that allow women to make decisions about reproduction on their own terms are mere entitlements.
Anyway, back to your last question. Is it recommended/required that the items you listed be used under the supervision of a medical provider? Do you need a prescription for hot water or toothbrushes? These are basic goods that people should have access to but they’re not medical expenses.
“Who determines what is within reason?”
Legal precedent. The courts. The First Amendment isn’t absolute–where did you read that it was?
BV,
Let me make this simple for you. We have a First Amendment in this country. It guarantees Freedom of Religion. It doesn’t promise that we will always like or agree with the religious convictions and practices of others. It doesn’t guarantee we won’t be inconvenienced. But it does guarantee American citizens the right to exercise their religious freedom.
So live with that fact, understand that you might be put upon to spend $4-9 at Walmart for BC pills, and get over it.
No Mary, I won’t “get over it.” You seem to be operating under the assumption that “freedom of religion” is an absolute; it’s most certainly not (can Christian Scientists deny their kids life-saving medical care? No). By operating affiliated institutions in the public, secular sphere, religious institutions can expect their “freedom of expression” to be balanced against the rights of other groups and individuals. That’s what living in a pluralistic society’s all about.
“So live with that fact, understand that you might be put upon to spend $4-9 at Walmart for BC pills, and get over it.”
…except that the state has decided that women’s reproductive health is a compelling interest that outweighs any objections that religiously-affiliated institutions might have to birth control. YOU deal with it.
BV,
Sorry I didn’t make it simple enough for you to understand.