Obama takes Fluke on “war on women” road show; releases yet another pro-Planned Parenthood ad
An ABC headline today reports, “Obama to Stoke ‘War on Women’ Debate in Colorado,” confirming the president’s “return to the gender politics of earlier in the cycle,” as reported by Politico a few days ago.
Obama is upping the ante, taking Georgetown Law School grad Sandra Fluke on the road with him on a two-day campaign trek through Colorado. Rush Limbaugh infamously called (then retracted) Fluke a “slut” for testifying in Congress she thought she should get free contraceptive through her Catholic university’s insurance plan.
Obama also continues to further tie himself to Planned Parenthood. In addition to a television ad released over the weekend touting the United States’ largest abortion chain, the Obama campaign released a web ad yesterday, discussed here. This ad marked Obama’s fourth pitch for Planned Parenthood, free contraceptives, and “family planning services” in a month. (Also see “Troubled” and “Women’s Choices”.)
It is fascinating to watch Obama promote Planned Parenthood to the extent that he is. He could certainly push the pro-contraception/abortion agenda without mentioning the abortion giant.
I go back to the fact that Planned Parenthood must be scoring well in his internal polls.
Or it could be that Planned Parenthood isn’t scoring so well in the polls, and Obama needs to raise its favorables so any advertising it does on his behalf gets a better response. Synergy.
But Planned Parenthood sure is a risky dance partner.
[Photo via Politico]
You always knew they would bring Fluke back around to make sure to get those who support abortion to get out and vote for taking life. The attack against women is a made up idea of the progressive left to keep abortion legal. Does planned parenthood do some good, sure but supporting abortion takes much or all of that away.
3 likes
I wonder if Sandra does more push-ups than Michelle.
2 likes
Women live longer than men. Women are much less likely to be killed or injured on the job than men. Women are much less likely to be incarcerated or executed than men. Even when rape is included, men are more likely to be victimized by violent crime than women.
Don’t men have many of the characteristics associated with an “oppressed” group?
0 likes
Try again, Martha. I’m not religious.
secularprolife.org
Think about someone having done what you just stated to you when you were that old, then get back to us. Let me know your true thoughts on the subject once you have some.
(I wonder which troll that got their rhetorical backside handed to them on the other threads Martha is? Cara? Sydney? Kathleen/Kathi? I swear, I’m not religious, but once they’ve lost the debate, they get all kinds of Exorcist!)
Language warning (particularly if you’re religious, do not go here):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRdLJ6e7j_0
^me
6 likes
Xalisae, you are probably one of the women who had an abortion and because of the shame people placed on you, are doing you penance. Well, that’s your problem if I am correct.
0 likes
“Xalisae, you are probably one of the women who had an abortion and because of the shame people placed on you, are doing you penance. Well, that’s your problem if I am correct.”
So much LOL. Tell em, x.
12 likes
This guy poll-tests every word that comes out of his mouth. Dancing with Planned Parenthood must be profitable to him somehow.
2 likes
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Sweetie, I’m not here because I had an abortion. I’m here because I didn’t, and my daughter is alive today because of that, and she otherwise would be dead. I’m here because there are literally THOUSANDS of children gestating away right now that are in the exact same place she was 10 years ago, but who don’t have the benefit of a mother who knows human growth and development. Because there are some mothers in a horrible situation like I was, who were poor, and homeless, and being pressured to abort by their children’s fathers, who didn’t take college biology/have 5 younger siblings like I had at that time and found it very easy to buy the “just a clump of cells” bullcrap. The “it’s not a child” bullcrap. The “non-sentient blobtumor” bullcrap. I’m here for all those children. You couldn’t BE more WRONG, in every sense.
EDIT: LOL! JDC, you know me so well already! I was typing that up before I even saw your comment! XD
21 likes
there are literally THOUSANDS of children gestating away right now
Yup. That’s right. That’s what these kids are doing right now. That’s their job. No one has a right to take that job from them.
I love X
12 likes
Thank you, Prax. <3
5 likes
xalisae , Jesus loves you and so do I…
6 likes
I didn’t become pro-life because some other pro-lifer guilted me into it. I became pro-life because my child’s absence remained, persistently, a gap in my life. I got tired of the uber-feminist notion that if I continued to miss the person I had killed, that there must be something wrong with ME. It has been my fellow pro-lifers that have shown the most compassion and understanding. It was my pro-choice friends who could only advise “have a drink and stop thinking about it.” If I had taken their advice, I’d be in rehab by now.
15 likes
So confused…
I’m assuming “Martha” had some comments deleted. Must have been a doozy since “Kathie/leen” got to stay on the other post.
Did someone send out a “kill Jill” memo to pro abortions blogs??? Between this one and the actress one–sheesh I never knew so many
could hate so much.
Ninek- I’m so sorry for your lost child, I’m relieved you had moral support.
X- thank you for choosing life for your daughter, that really warmed my heart to read.
5 likes
Obama wins if he keeps the gender margin up. That’s why he keeps hammering this message. It continues to work and keeps female base energized.
Three new polls released today from Quinnipiac.
Colorado – among women, Obama up 51-43
Virginia – among women, Obama up 54-40
Wisconsin – among women, Obama up 59-36
0 likes
Which gender margin? Because among men you can reverse those figures.
5 likes
What is wrong with this picture. Sandra Fluke can afford a Colorado road trip but says she wants me to spring for her contraception. If she skipped the trip she could buy her own contraception for the next five years.
14 likes
Fluke is nothing but an Obama political whore.
2 likes
A tale of two women. One insulted for begging. One insulted for giving. I’ll have a chicken sandwich and a smile to go, thank you.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-five/index.html
5 likes
“What is wrong with this picture. Sandra Fluke can afford a Colorado road trip but says she wants me to spring for her contraception.”
Despite your name, you’re not telling the truth which is that you are NOT paying for Sandra Fluke’s birth control – unless you work at Georgetown University. She spoke on behalf of those students at Catholic colleges that don’t provide coverage for contraception in student health care plans (some do including Notre Dame which covers Viagra). Contraception with no co-payment is paid for by those who already are paying for their health care policies. Health insurance providers have no problem with it as, according to a report issued by Kaiser, they feel that the cost of birth control is far less than pregnancy related costs. But again, despite the pro-life lies, the taxpayer is not paying for Sandra Fluke’s birth control. And BTW, the cost of an IUD is far higher than that of birth control pills.
3 likes
One thing pro choicers have to get straight is that no one put shame on those o f us who have had abortions..we felt shame because what we did is shameful! We participated in the death of our own children.
To keep making it seem like something is wrong with us or to blame society because we felt guilt and shame is ridiculous. I would NEVER want to be able to do that be okay with it. That is not something to be okay with. If a mass murder feels no shame does that mean what he did is okay? The logic is crazy.
No, I did not feel shame because of other people, I felt shame because I saw my DEAD son and what abortion really was…and I am grateful my heart is not so dead that it would be okay with me
I so wish Romney would do a commercial with some healed post abortive women to speak about the real war. I am sure there are millions of women who would be sitting on their couches who would totally relate.
9 likes
Dance partner? Jill you’re being too kind.
Planned Parenthood is not a dance partner – rapist is much more like it.
Just ask Susan G. Komen Foundation.
As for POTUS – Obama is nothing more than Planned Parenthood’s puppet.
6 likes
CC: Health insurance providers have no problem with it
So untrue. Some “health insurance providers” not only have a problem with it, they are suing over it.
Newland v Sebelius
4 likes
“As for POTUS – Obama is nothing more than Planned Parenthood’s puppet.”
While GW Bush was a puppet for the religious right’s bogus abstinence education lobby.
Hey Chris, Providence Planned Parenthood alive and well. In RI, you and your anti-choice militants are viewed as quaint and, on occasion, annoying part of a very peripheral group.
2 likes
Amen Theresa B!! Love you!!
If I have to pay for her “stuff” the least Fluke can do for me is dress up as genitalia and provide me with some street theater!!
8 likes
“If I have to pay for her “stuff” the least Fluke can do for me is dress up as genitalia and provide me with some street theater!!”
You’re neither a student at or an employee of Georgetown. As such you’re not paying for her “stuff.” What part of that can’t you people accept? And “street theater” – that’s the scene outside any and all Planned Parenthood clinics in this country. Put it this way, it doesn’t do much to endear your cult to the mainstream. In our state, the number of ”counselors” is dwindling down to some old ladies with rosaries. Meanwhile, there is a steady stream of patients who go to Planned Parenthood – an organization that is vigorously supported by the RI reality based community.
3 likes
”So untrue. Some “health insurance providers” not only have a problem with it, they are suing over it.
Newland v Sebelius”
So untrue. The “Newland” in the case represents the family that own Hercules Industries, a company owned by anti-birth control Catholics. While they self-insure, they are not an insurance company. Please cite any cases being brought by insurance companies. Oh right, you can’t.
1 likes
Then how about me, CC? I do happen to be a law student at a Catholic university, and I knew and ACCEPTED that the insurance that the CATHOLIC SCHOOL helps subsidize DID NOT cover contraception. Boo hoo. If I didn’t like it, I could have gone somewhere else. Alternatively, I also had the option of getting outside insurance that covers whatever I want (amusingly enough, I chose outside insurance that DIDN’T cover birth control…isn’t that funny? Obviously, the insurance company was discriminating against me.) No one forced Fluke to attend Georgetown, and no one forced me to attend my Catholic school.
And you’re missing the point if you think it’s all about “cost”… the point is that these Catholic institutions consider themselves to be complicit in leading others to sin by offering abortive and contraceptive devices/drugs. They aren’t complaining about paying for the students or their employees to have healthy babies, because that’s not a sin. They feel helping to pay for, even if cheaper, things that are inherently wrong in their eyes (including vasectomies under the HHS mandate, which you lovely feminazis conveniently always leave out in your “war on women” spiel… tell me, what kind of vasectomies are performed on women?) is what’s wrong, not that it’s more or less costly. Grow a conscience. Thanks.
11 likes
CC – In our state, the number of ”counselors” is dwindling down to some old ladies with rosaries.
LOL. Look at all the old ladies with rosaries!
http://thericatholic.com/detail/4813.html
Click here for more photos
5 likes
CC – While they self-insure, they are not an insurance company.
Hahahahahahahaha!
“health insurance providers”
3 likes
Love the pic, Lrning. :) Does it count if I’m a young lady with a rosary (I’m 24…)?
6 likes
Ah CC. You never disappoint.
I knew that if I said genitalia or street theater you would pounce.
Good morning sunshine!!
9 likes
And here she is, the democRAT wart on women, missy phluck [her pronunciation].
Still shillin for her long legged mac daddy.
‘Buddy, I’m down on my luck and I’m waiting for my ship to come in. Can you spare a prophylactic?”
Hey missy, when you are of no further value to mr. bo-jangles and he has kicked you to the curb and you are looking for another new master to serve, the moonies can always use a another gullible gal like you to scarf for dollars.
I’m still waiting for that video clip of mama and papa Fluke smiling broadly and proclaiming how proud they are of their progeny.
5 likes
Boo hoo. If I didn’t like it, I could have gone somewhere else.
That’s what I say. She knew that Georgetown was a Catholic University, did she really expect them to pay for her B.C.’s?
And I know I sound like a broken record, but if you’re in a sexual relationship with a man, shouldn’t he pay half of the cost of birth control? Couldn’t Sandra Fluke ask her parther to help? If you’re sleeping with a man and he doesn’t want to cough up the money to pay for half of your pills, IUD, or whatever, I think its time to reevaluate the relationship.
9 likes
Lyssie says: Does it count if I’m a young lady with a rosary
Apparently, even the young boys in those pictures count as “old ladies with rosaries” in CC’s mind. LOL. She’s a hoot.
6 likes
“But Planned Parenthood sure is a risky dance partner.”
If you gotta dance with the whore that brung ya, double down on the condoms and anitbiotics cause you are dancing with all the others who came before you.
[I use the term ‘whore’ in a non-gender specific manner.]
4 likes
Phillymiss: But that would make too much sense!! These “empowered” women who don’t want to depend on a man to give them what they want are all too happy to have the government step in and be the sugar daddy who patronizingly provides everything (or forces others to do so…how empowering). If that’s what “equality” looks like, I don’t want it. Honestly, and this is coming from someone who used BC at one point to ease symptoms of a reproductive problem. I didn’t starve paying for them while I was in college. Sandra Fluke is an entitled brat who doesn’t represent me or the numerous other law school women who…guess what? are actually aspiring to be independent.
6 likes
The lady doth protest too much, Carla. cc comes here to bask in our ‘get well soon’ prayers. It’s never to late to be pro-life, cc. All across the country people are praying for you, with and without rosaries! Join us, embrace the beauty of life! Join us for cookies, even. I read that Norma McCorvey was started on her conversion journey by a cute child and a pizza (“Won by Love”). Anything is possible. You could even remain snarky and be pro-life, imagine that!
10 likes
Ninek: Lol…evidently we can be pro-life and snarky… as in the reigning Queen of Snark, xalisae. :)
This is from one of my favorite online rants against the fembots who crave governmental patriarchy at my CATHOLIC university…
Here it is again for those who have comprehension problems(read: CC): no one cares that anyone uses any actual contraception, who they’re with, how much they have sex, when they do it, WHATEVER. No one cares. The hysterics are cute, though. The point is that since no one’s ever died from lack of nookie, “underprivileged women” who freely choose to attend or work for these institutions equally won’t die if that religious institution doesn’t wish to subsidize the aforementioned behavior through its WIDELY KNOWN coverages because of its well-documented beliefs. They also don’t cover vasectomies, but since that doesn’t fit into the happy little “anti-woman” rant, it’s left out…though the mandate would ALSO force these institutions to cover this procedure that they also find abhorrent. And if you’re having trouble getting “access” (apparently “access” no longer means having something WIDELY AVAILABLE EVERYWHERE, but that something available for 9 dollars/month at the local Target or WalMart, something so “prohibitively expensive for poor women”, must be subsidized by the very institutions that cannot do so in good conscience), there are a bunch of get-up-and-go EMPOWERED ways to get your hands on the coveted, rare little pills. You can either go to a secular school that has no problem carrying the coverage (it’s your CHOICE, RIGHT?), buy your own plan unaffiliated with the school/workplace, or make an empowered trip to the Target or the WalMart to get your 9-dollar/month generics. And if it’s really tough, and you’re feeling REEEEEEEALLY empowered, you can mosey on down to the county health clinic where you can get some of these delightful concoctions for free or on a sliding scale. The slut talk is cute, but let’s be honest…it’s not about “women’s health”, its about being able to force religious institutions that actually have convictions to do things contrary to their beliefs. And about the “medical issues” that everyone always brings up regarding women using contraception, I can point you to several sources indicating that the use of oral contraceptives can exacerbate some medical situations while masking the pain. And this is coming from someone who used to suffer from dysmenorrhea and managed to pay for my own hormonal treatments just fine, until I was able to find alternate treatment that didn’t screw with my hormone system and just mask the problem. They never actually treat the conditions, and there are several other treatment plans that WOULD be covered with no moral objections. Birth control is not the be-all, end-all with healthcare. The vast majority of workplaces and schools cover it willingly, and that’s PERFECTLY OK. NO ONE OBJECTS TO THAT. What people object to is making an employer or a school with fundamental beliefs that object to an elective drug or procedure help SUBSIDIZE IT, while anyone who works there/attends there had the perfectly free choice to attend there or work there knowing the institution’s policies. It’s disingenuous to pretend otherwise.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052970203370604577263281305035966-lMyQjAxMTAyMDAwNzEwNDcyWj.html?mod=wsj_share_email
13 likes
“If I have to pay for her “stuff” the least Fluke can do for me is dress up as genitalia and provide me with some street theater!! “
You mean like an unhinged nutcase? (Just in case joan shows up, I want her to know her terminology is still in use :) )
6 likes
Lyssie at 10:10 am – awesome post.
Best line: “No one forced Fluke to attend Georgetown, and no one forced me to attend my Catholic school”
5 likes
yeah. Fluke is a professional agitator and fake professional victim.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/sandra-fluke-a-fake-victim-of-georgetowns-policy-on-contraceptives/
She went to Georgetown BECAUSE of their policy, because she wanted to take religious rights and freedoms away from others. I have ZERO sympathy for trash like that.
11 likes
Thanks, Eric. I go to school with too many people just like Fluke. I have TONS to say on the issue. They all play the victim game. Of what? Their own choice to attend the Catholic law school they didn’t have to apply to in the first place? I can’t stand these women who complain about discrimination and patriarchy when all they want is to institute their own paternalistic system that gives them everything they want while discriminating against others. If you’re so damn empowered, achieve whatever the hell you want… you don’t need anyone else to give you a leg up to do it. Make good decisions, and really take control of your own life with your OWN choices and your OWN money from a source that YOU choose.
7 likes
As long as we’re snarky and proud of it, how come no body who went to college with the Obaminator will come forward and say that she dated him? Did he ask his partners to fund their own “protection?” Did he get his own “protection” via the state? If you had dated the current pres, wouldn’t you be loud and proud? If you dated the pres and he actually brought his own condoms, wouldn’t you be proud and want the world to know what a swell fella he really is? I find a conspicuous absense in the media… I know more about Mrs. Romney’s horse than anyone who might have dated Obama before Michelle. Gosh, Clinton’s exes were so eager for attention and so numerous, we’d have to rent a fleet of buses to get them all to the same dinner (especially since half of them would want to bring their plastic surgeons as guests.).
For someone so obsessed with government financed sexual activity that he’s hitched his wagon to Planned Parenthood with an unbreakable cord, I find the current president’s lack of exes to be, well, vexing. Come on ladies and gents, aren’t any of you proud??
9 likes
Thank you JDC!!
“unhinged nutcase” LOL
Don’t want Joanie to feel left out!!
5 likes
”the point is that these Catholic institutions consider themselves to be complicit in leading others to sin by offering abortive and contraceptive devices/drugs.”
Then why do a number of Catholic institutions of higher ed already pay for contraceptives if it’s against their faith. Hypocrisy much?
2 likes
Hey, y’all, I wouldn’t get too worked up about this. I think it’s just a Fluke. ;)
9 likes
“CC – While they self-insure, they are not an insurance company.
Hahahahahahahaha! “health insurance providers”
When I referenced the position of insurance companies (NB the word company) I was referring to companies that are exclusively for the purpose of providing health care coverage . (Blue Cross, United etc.) I was not referring to companies that self insure. Big difference. Hercules is not an insurance company.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
2 likes
if it’s against their faith
Hahahahahaha! I’m finding comedy gold today where I usually find irritation.
4 likes
Hercules is not an insurance company.
Well, duh. So when you said “health insurance providers” you didn’t really mean that. Got it.
2 likes
“LOL. Look at all the old ladies with rosaries!”
I was referring to those who protest at Planned Parenthood in Providence. I’m there. Are you?
But loved the photo. Good old St. Paul’s where I spent 8 years getting indoctrinated by nuns who no longer teach at the school which has all lay staff. But while the membership of the parish is way down. RI is no longer the most Catholic state. The number who identify as Catholic dropped from 58 to 44%) it remains a hotbed of anti-choice militancy. And funny, the group in the photo was going to a woman’s clinic not affiliated with Planned Parenthood for some kind of special event. On the day that abortions are performed there, there are usually no more than two elderly protesters who don’t get to do the usual histrionics because the parking lot is at the rear of the building. Some years back, there were bigger groups and the neighborhood folks were not too receptive to the anti-choice “street theater.” But the lifers lost interest so the neighbors are happier.
1 likes
Oh, and Lyssie, riddle me why Georgetown pays for contraceptive coverage for their employees and not their students. Doesn’t that mean that they’re complicit in mortal sin (cuz birth control is one of the biggies on the Catholic top sin hits list!!!)
3 likes
Students at Notre Dame are petitioning the school to drop its lawsuit against the HHS mandate. Looks like some folks are in need of confession?
1 likes
Oooh, thanks CC. In googling the PP in Providence, I found a pro-abort blog that has the most perplexing thing to say about abortion:
“A woman going through an emotionally wrenching time is leaving a clinic after an invasive medical procedure, and this protester, this monster, this sociopath gives the woman baby socks in an effort to shame and humiliate her.”
What! Didn’t I read right here on this blog that abortion is an “easy peasy” medical procedure?! I’m sure I did. Someone forgot to send that memo to Steve Ahlquist.
7 likes
There’s a nice scan of the crowd at the 1:20 mark. I think someone wishes they were as young as these “old ladies”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyRVeICvk3o
3 likes
Brava, Lyssie, Brava!
2 likes
CC: Whether or not a “Catholic” institution did or did not cover contraceptives (let’s be honest, institutions like Georgetown and Notre Dame long ago lost any real “Catholic” inspiration…but I digress), what about other institutions who specifically DON’T offer it…to either students or staff? Are they allowed to stick to their guns, or just the ones that caved partially against their religious foundings? I specifically said that institutions believing that they are leading others into sin by offering such coverage should not be forced to cover anything THEY VIEW as sinful. If Georgetown’s leadership doesn’t believe so, then I can’t do anything about it (though what I think of them as a “catholic” school might suffer…there’s nothing inherently unconstitutional about their choice). Comprehension, much? I don’t consider it hypocritical if the decision to offer coverage for certain things, whether at a Catholic or secular institution, was made freely (even though religiously, some of these institutions might be severely deviating from what’s right… but then again, you purposely misconstrued and extrapolated to devout institutions that DON’T offer these things, ever). And did you miss that part where I mentioned that if an institution CHOOSES to offer it, whether or not they’re Catholic, that’s not something I care about? They freely chose to do so!! It’s FORCING any institution to violate their beliefs through their wallets, whether by forcing them to extend coverage to where it’s never been or pushing it further to include others outside of employees that is the problem. I personally might not think certain places deserve the Catholic title, but that’s not the problem. Lrn2read.
Oh wow, students are protesting at Notre Dame? Well color me SHOCKED. Let’s see, a “Catholic” university (I am hesitant to still call Notre Dame that…but whatever) that allows students from all backgrounds, not just Catholic, to attend, and YOU’RE shocked that there’s protesters trying to get the Catholic school to cover their pills, abortions, procedures, and contraceptive devices? No one is forcing them to turn Catholic by going there, but then again, no one forced them to go to a Catholic school that they were DAMN WELL aware didn’t cover their sex candy.
Wah wah wah…I’m SO discriminated against by going to a school that I knew wouldn’t cover my pills. I just had no CHOICE but to send that application, get the acceptance to several different schools, and STILL pick the one that didn’t have contraceptive coverage. WOE IS ME!! Look at all that discrimination!!
5 likes
Fluke fans. CC is in great company with these Rhodes Scholars:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aFIkK79Of8&feature=player_embedded
6 likes
x,
That mike covering is handy for picking up all the dust coming out of their heads, ;)
3 likes
LibertyBelle, do you have a facebook account? I clicked on your name and love your blog! :) If you’d like to connect via facebook, let me know (I’m friends with Carla and Xalisae if you need to connect through someone).
3 likes
cc, I have a serious question for you: you’ve really kept up on many things Catholic, and for that I applaud you. Curious, what did you think of John Paul II’s The Theology of the Body? I would really like to know your thoughts on his material. If you haven’t yet read any of it, please do, so that you can come back here and argue with me/us about it. What did you think of John Paul II in general while he was Pope? Did you find him likeable? Intelligent? Just wonderin’.
-Ninek
4 likes
Hey Lyssie! I’d love to be connected with all three of you! :) And thanks! It hasn’t been updated in a loooooong time because I just went through a move.
2 likes
CC: “Students at Notre Dame are petitioning the school to drop its lawsuit against the HHS mandate.”
Which proves that their Catholic education is incomplete.
Among other mistakes in their thinking is that a merely discretionary act ought not be done. There’s a difference between something not being necessary, and the something’s contrary being necessary.
Double effect is indeed relevant, and the students raise a good point. The problem is that they’re not raising other, equally good points.
4 likes
“Curious, what did you think of John Paul II’s The Theology of the Body? I would really like to know your thoughts on his material.”
I am unfamiliar with the work and could care less about the writings of a fabulously wealthy, celibate (at least on paper) leader of a sexist world religion (cult?) that has been responsible for millenia of intolerance and brutality. As far as JP II – while I admire his attempts to reach out to other world leaders and his apology for those millenia of intolerance, I also find his views on homosexuality and women’s reproductive rights to be abhorrent. He once said that motherhood is the ideal for women and, IMHO, that’s just more sexist bunk. But what is really contemptible is his embrace of Fr. Marcel Marcial, the founder of the Legion of Christ who sexually molested a score of boys and who fathered several children out of wedlock. The only thing I give the former member of the Nazi youth and current pope credit for is throwing Marcial under the bus.
And Lyssie, if Catholic institutions don’t want to follow the law, then perhaps they should no longer receive federal monies which they receive because they are, for official purposes, not exclusively Catholic institutions. Can’t have it both ways.
You must be quite popular at campus social events. Or do you spend your week-ends in prayer with suitably virginal fellow Catholic students?
1 likes
“Despite your name, you’re not telling the truth which is that you are NOT paying for Sandra Fluke’s birth control”
CC, Fluke went before congress to rail that she deserves federally subsidized birth control. I said she WANTS me to pay for her BC, not that I do pay for her BC. We don’t have to start paying for her BC until next year; unless we can somehow stop the Obamacare BC provision that is due to get implemented.
4 likes
Oh, CC, I love it how you can’t actually respond to my points. Since ad hominem is the soup du jour of ineptitude, I should mention that I am, indeed, a hoot at many of the gatherings. I’ve been dubbed the “party fairy” for my delicious jello shots and iPower hour song mixes. But then again…why does a cute young happy 20-something need to justify herself to a bitter old harpy? :)
You do realize that federal funds were offered to Catholic institutions in the first place, right (as in, the government noticed that private and religious institutions were far better at educating and treating and offering charity to people than the government itself, and decided to support those efforts)? It’s not like the Church started its charitable and educational efforts under the thumb of the government; they were doing GREAT before the government came along. It’s also not like the Church was expected to change the way it did things at first just because it was offered more money for its charitable and educational undertakings. I, for one, would be glad if the Catholic Church and other successful private institutions would stop being beholden to the secular amoral government and take charge of their own affairs like they used to, but until relatively recently, the government was happy to support charities and religious organizations in their missions without forcing them to compromise their moral mandates. The whole point is that this is being fought against from becoming a permanent law, one which would infringe the rights MENTIONED IN THE VERY FIRST AMENDMENT of countless religious institutions and employers (including that one above with the in-house insurance-offering business run by catholics…now THEY don’t receive federal monies, ain’t that a b*tch? So why should they be forced, amirite?). The schools have a right, and indeed, a huge reason to fight against this becoming a permanent law, as they have a sincere belief that some of their very core religious beliefs are being threatened. You act as if they don’t have a foot on which to stand; if the first amendment isn’t one, then I don’t know what is.
Now, if you’ve strapped on your Depends for the night and fed your numerous cats, can you please respond to ANYTHING ELSE I’ve said in my previous messages, or will you continue to speculate in a deliciously ad hominem manner about my prudishness/lack of social activity? I love the change of subject and unwillingness to address anything I’ve said above. But hurry, I’ll be getting ready to go out for the night since my pre-menopausal body can still handle booze. Lol.
7 likes
I find it odd that someone who is herself celibate finds that an objectionable trait in another person. Hmm.
Reproduction is sexist? Wow, those damn birds and bees! They’re just dupes of the patriarchy! We should all be like yeast, right? no gender! Yeast! So evolved! Hooray, let’s see if the human race can devolve back to the protozoan stage! Woo hoo! I’d go have a snack, but my darn apple was created by a tree that reproduced. UGH! Patriarchal fruit! I must learn to subsit on a diet of ameobas and volvox colonies! No wait, the volvox are slaves, right? Liberate the volvox!
9 likes
subsist. Editing ran out.
1 likes
“subsist. Editing ran out.”
Q: When does the editing run out at jillstanek.com?
A: As soon as you realize you’ve made a mistake.
4 likes
“some do including Notre Dame which covers Viagra”
Notre Dame does not cover contraception unless it is needed to treat a medical condition. If a woman and her doctor conspire to use that to get the university to pay for contraception that is not needed for treatment, that is their sin, not the university’s. There is no conflict in covering medications used to treat certain medical issues that are also used as contraceptives.
Viagra is not a contraceptive so not sure what you mean unless you’re just parroting the sad liberal non sequitur that those who oppose contraceptives are really just opposed to sex so we should be opposed to Viagra too. Viagra treats a dysfunction of the male reproductive system just as contraception can sometimes do for females. Nothing nefarious or inconsistent. But keep tilting at windmills.
Also, just because some Catholic entities voluntarily sin, the government should be able to force all Catholic organizations to do so?
7 likes
Since the first picture I saw of Sandra Fluke, I can’t help thinking of how much she reminds me of Monica Lewinsky.
Only…. I felt sorry for Monica Lewinsky.
5 likes
“Now, if you’ve strapped on your Depends for the night and fed your numerous cats, can you please respond to ANYTHING ELSE I’ve said in my previous messages, or will you continue to speculate in a deliciously ad hominem manner about my prudishness/lack of social activity?”
And you say that I engage in ad-hominems, really? And BTW, I have only one cat an one husband so you’ll have to come up with something better. And BTW, I can probably run a faster mile than you but whatever.
But let’s dish, shall we? As your “points” seem to be surrounded by an abundance of incoherent rants, I’ll try to extract what appear to be your arguments.
“The point is that since no one’s ever died from lack of nookie, “underprivileged women” who freely choose to attend or work for these institutions equally won’t die if that religious institution doesn’t wish to subsidize the aforementioned behavior through its WIDELY KNOWN coverages because of its well-documented beliefs.”
While a cute turn of phrase, “lack of nookie” is irrelevent. What is relevant is the law. While you and your roman collared coutured pals contend that your First Amendment rights are violated what you actually want is a special privilege to discriminate. But allow me to quote Sarah Lipton Lubet of the Washington DC ACLU as she is more conversant with the law than both of us. In describing court decisions that went against “religious liberty” vis-a-vis the attempt by CA and NY Catholic Charities to avoid having to comply with state mandated birth control coverage she says this:
“As the New York Court of Appeals explained, there is no “absolute right for a religiously-affiliated employer to structure all aspects of its relationship with its employees in conformity with church teachings.” In other words, providing insurance coverage that includes contraception doesn’t infringe on religious liberty. The California Supreme Court, in turn, explained that mandatory contraceptive coverage “serves the compelling state interest of eliminating gender discrimination.” Which means that even if there were a burden on religion, the government can act to protect the best interests of women.” She concludes “that brings us back to what’s really going on here. The fight these institutions are waging isn’t about religious liberty at all. It’s about whether a woman should have insurance coverage for birth control; coverage that she can then decide what to do with, based on her own beliefs and health needs.”
And there is court precedent. In discussing the position of the Catholic bishops, Adam Winkler, a professor of constitutional law at UCLA, states that there is no First Amendment violation. He cites “Employment Division v Smith” in which Judge Scalia wrote the decision in which the state of Oregon was upheld in its decision to withhold unemployment insurance to those who smoked peyote as part of their religious tradition. Scalia writes “To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”
“I specifically said that institutions believing that they are leading others into sin by offering such coverage should not be forced to cover anything THEY VIEW as sinful.”
Perhaps these institutions should consider not paying their female workers given that some of those paychecks could be used for “sinful” birth control. But snark aside, considerations of Catholic “sin” should not be given precedence over secular law. Moreover, the taxpayers of this country should not be forced to provide assistance to organizations that are engaging in discriminatory practices based on their, IMHO, sexist, medieval theology.
I believe I answered your “First Amendment” concerns. As far as other “points,” they were lost in all the histrionic chaff being thrown about. Now enjoy your jello shots and say a nice “Act of Contrition.” I must admit, you are quite the little soldier of Christ. Perhaps you will get a special “indulgence” for your work. And better a “bitter harpy” than a militant member of the Catholic Taliban youth brigade!
1 likes
CC,
So Planned Parenthood needs you to step it up over here?
You have been given more hours? More pay?
Waiting for the screen shot of a lifetime?
4 likes
“So Planned Parenthood needs you to step it up over here?
You have been given more hours? More pay?”
I’m so enjoying being in the 1%!!! ;)
1 likes
Oh please, CC… again, and I’ve emphasized this for the THIRD, and tired, time… what about vasectomies? You again gloss over that because it doesn’t fit your “anti-woman discrimination” tirade. If the state has a compelling interest in saving women from discrimination (which this isn’t, but it’s cute of you to get all hysterical), then how does the Church’s equally vehement refusal to pay for vasectomies fit into all of this? (Hint: it doesn’t.) Simply because there are MORE options for women, does not mean that the Church discriminates against them because it STILL won’t cover the more limited options of men. I find it amusing that you quoted an ACLU lawyer who also glossed over that fact (it doesn’t matter how much anyone knows about law if they’re ignoring facts to fit their agenda). Try again, Granny.
And everyone knows the tired old tirade of Employment Division v. Smith. Where, in that, did you get that the government can require a POSITIVE ACTION from someone through their wallet as opposed to being able to establish a negative prohibition for the sake of employment? You’re only making my point for me. What the employer requires of its employees as requisite for employment (no hallucinogenic drug use) fits my point exactly…the employee is FREE TO LEAVE knowing those policies. Since everyone has the choice of where to work/attend school, you’re free to research what requirements that place of employment/school has and what prohibitions they have based on religious and/or safety concerns. Based on that, you can choose to work there knowing you won’t be able to get all the benefits if you engage in your religious practice. In this case, the situation is completely reversed; apparently now the employer is required to PROVIDE something (a positive action). This is NOT the Smith case at all. If the place I wanted to work had a prohibition against something I do for MY religious practices, then I still have the right to leave. The whole point was that this came down on the employer’s side…the right to have standards in place for employment. If the employee doesn’t like it, then they are free to leave and find alternative employment that allows for their religious practice. Similarly, any person, male or female, who wants to work at a Catholic institution KNOWS what they can and cannot offer in the way of health insurance. If a woman doesn’t like that they don’t cover birth control, she doesn’t have to work there. If a man doesn’t like that they don’t cover vasectomies, then he doesn’t have to work there, either. Don’t you just LOVE that “discrimination” based on deeply-held beliefs?
As to paying female employees, you do realize you’re being rather facetious. You do realize that there’s a difference between directly subsidizing what the institution believes is unethical (paying for coverage for contraceptives/abortive drugs/procedures) and paying someone their wages for which the facility and the person freely contracted…right? If you’re too dense to understand the difference, then I can’t help you. Men and women can freely use that money for nefarious purposes (including the vasectomies that you continue to ignore), but that’s on them, not the institution that paid them for work or services performed. You could very well be using your wages to bet on dog fights, but it’s not sinful or unethical for your employer to pay you for work performed. Wow. It was painful to have to explain that to a grown woman.
And again, if your “humble opinion” is based on factually non-existent discrimination, it doesn’t really matter what you think. The taxpayers have been helping to subsidize institutions with religious missions for quite some time with no problem (at the government’s, NOT the institutions’ behest). It’s only relatively recently that these institutions are being required to turn their backs on those missions to satisfy what the government wants.
I believe that you didn’t answer my First Amendment concerns. Since there’s no discrimination based on gender (again, VASECTOMIES), and no compelling state interest to prevent it, you still have to tell me how this doesn’t violate the first amendment. What gender (or other) discrimination exists?
Yep, so TOTALLY a member of the Catholic Youth Taliban. I loves me some Jesus. You’re right about the ad hominem. I shouldn’t have stooped to your level in the first place. Enjoy that mile run, it’s not like I was a state-qualifying cross country runner or anything. <3 Toodles.
5 likes
Lyssie, I thoroughly enjoy your posts and wish I could “like” them more than once.
3 likes
Hahaha Lyssie, I wish I could like your comments twice too. :)
Hey, CC, you’re not being fair! I want to be a little soldier for Christ too! Though I’m not part of the Catholic Youth Taliban, I’ll enjoy some jello shots with Lyssie. ;) And I’d much rather be a happy follower of Christ and have joy, love and peace in my life than be a bitter woman like you. Lighten up and join us on the side of life!
4 likes
“I’ll enjoy some jello shots with Lyssie”
I agree, let’s all enjoy some now. It’ll be the only thing that might make reading CC’s comments tolerable.
3 likes
Thanks, Lrning and LibertyBelle!!! You’re both more than welcome to come over for some jello shots… Hey, I’m Catholic… If Jesus turned water into wine, someone drank it! Amirite?? Lol. Gotta love the Irish Catholics especially (I’m not, but my ‘Catholic Taliban’ boyfriend is… Liver like a sponge and a heart of gold… Always a great time here.) :)
4 likes
JDC… You’re welcome to do some shots too… Lol. I didn’t refresh the page in time to see your comment. :) I need a beer for some of the crap I unfortunately come across here… :P
3 likes
Lyssie, I must say that I agree. And He made such good wine, the guests complained that He didn’t bring it out earlier. ;) Well, I’m not Catholic, but I am Irish, that and Italian… So my motto is that I cook with wine, and sometimes I put it in the food. ;) And JDC, we can all get together and have a drinking game while reading CC’s comments. For every pro-abortion talking point, take a shot. Though we’d be out by the time we reached the end of one comment… lol :)
Lyssie, I’m not the most tech-savy youth in the world, may I ask how I would go about finding you on the Book of Faces? ;)
3 likes
If the Wisconsin BBQ ever happens, maybe entertainment could be CC and Lyssie running the mile after 10 jello shots.
I’d be willing to chip in and pay their travel costs and I know who’d I put my money on to win . . . . . . .
4 likes
LMAO! Praxedes… Let’s party, all day errrrday!!
LibertyBelle: email Carla under the moderators section of this website. I’m her friend on facebook and she’ll be able to connect us. :) I can also ask her for your email that you use when you post comments here, and we can exchange info that way. Let me know if that’s ok! :)
3 likes
So Vatican Vestal Virgin wants to talk vasectomies. Fine.
Comparing contraceptives for women with vasectomies is like comparing Gregorian Chant with Lady Gaga. Totally unrelated. As the insurance companies have pointed out, contraception is not only a health issue but it is financial. Insurance companies say (so scream at them if you have to) that paying for contraception is cheaper than paying for pregnancy and its attendant costs. It’s also better for the employer as unplanned pregnancies can mean more sick time and the need for hiring somebody to fill in during a maternity leave (for which the US lags behind all industrialized nations – where are you pro-life folks on that one?). In addition to preventing pregnancies, birth control pills are used for medicinal reasons.
A vasectomy has no bearing on the health of the man. If a man doesn’t get a vasectomy, it has no fiduciary ramifications for the employer because men don’t get pregnant. I can’t believe I have to explain it to an obviously genius level college student but then she’s a devout Catholic (hope she and the boo visualize Piux XII if they are “tempted” to do the nasty cuz if that don’t cut the buzz, nothing will) so that says it all. So bottom line, there are a number of very practical reasons for implementing the HHS policy which, hooray, is no in effect for those nasty gals who work in the private sector. And that speaks to why it’s discriminatory for Catholic organizations and colleges to deny the same coverage for their workers, many of whom are evil heretics. But yeah, they can work elsewhere. Funny, that’s probably what some Southern employers and schools told minorities pre-Civil rights…
Hey Lyssie, what Catholic “institution” of higher ed do you attend? We have quite the Catholic college here in Providence and lots of the Catholic girls use the services of Planned Parenthood. Guess they’re those slutty “fem-bots” that you despise. (And I’m sure the feeling is quite mutual!) No go in peace, thanks be to whatever floats yer boat.
0 likes
Thanks, Lyssie! that’d be perfectly fine. ;)
It’s also better for the employer as unplanned pregnancies can mean more sick time and the need for hiring somebody to fill in during a maternity leave (for which the US lags behind all industrialized nations – where are you pro-life folks on that one?). In addition to preventing pregnancies, birth control pills are used for medicinal reasons.
CC. The point, though, is why should the GOVERNMENT force those who don’t believe in birth control to pay for it?
Come back off your rabbit trail for a few moments, okay, and try to focus. Our issue isn’t with how insurance companies cover reproductive procedures but the fact that the government is forcing Catholic organizations to violate their consciences. And that, CC, is wrong.
7 likes
“the government is forcing Catholic organizations to violate their consciences. And that, CC, is wrong”
And that will be settled in the courts.
0 likes
CC: “A vasectomy has no bearing on the health of the man. If a man doesn’t get a vasectomy, it has no fiduciary ramifications for the employer because men don’t get pregnant. I can’t believe I have to explain it to an obviously genius level college student…”
Um, CC? I can’t believe you need it explained to you that vasectomies prevent pregnancies. Hello? If the issue is that that’s cheaper than pregnancies…
7 likes
Wow!!! Men’s snippings aren’t birth control, ladies! You heard it here first. LOL! Cuz, it’s not like any male people ever claim their children as dependants or have their children covered on their health insurance. Amazing. I don’t know how my mother ended up squeezing so much money out of dad for food and clothing for us kids, when he didn’t have anything at all to do withour existence.
And I feel so left out; I’ve been eating ameoba sandwhiches for two days for nuthin’. Garsh.
You know what’s really stupid? DNA. Yep. Some people actually BELIEVE that DNA determines our gender. Poppycock! There is no such thing as gender: it’s merely a construct of the Great and Evil Patriarchy. How the Patriarchy got my dog to have puppies or my peach blossoms to be pollinated is a real condundrum, but surely some smarty pro-abortionist will explain to me how that happens.
7 likes
CC-
did you want to put you SS# or phone # in this thread too?
I know more personal info about you than anyone else that posts here, including Jill!
You might be more careful if you really believed we are all terrorists. SMH
2 likes
Oh, look, it’s a Moby.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=moby
2 likes
x,
I’ve got to visit urban dictionary more often. That certainly fits.
Here I thought the first half of his name was “Moby-“, if you catch my drift.
“Thar he blows!”
2 likes
Hans,
I like to keep up-to-date on the internet trends of the day. It helps when #WAR is being waged against us in new and ever-changing avenues all the time. We will adapt or die, and I’m not going down without a fight. Youth culture sucks sometimes, but it can also be a pretty entertaining place to hang out. And, I think part of the reason conservatives have had such a hard time up until now is because things had changed around them, and they didn’t see it or know how to use the changes to their advantage, or even how to deal with them in the slightest sense whatsoever. We’ve by-and-large begun the adaptation process at this point, and I want to help herald the New Wave. I want to ride it and guide it safely to a bright future, because I plan on being a part of that future, rather than being washed away.
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!
2 likes
x,
Oh, I’m down with all that. ;)
2 likes