hoyaLS05
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by hoyaLS05 on Mar 1, 2012 20:39:36 GMT -5
Considered putting this in the election thread, but thought it sufficiently unrelated to warrant its own. abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/rush-limbaugh-sandra-fluke-a-slut-and-prostitute/ Sandra Fluke, a third-year student at Georgetown University Law School, was barred from testifying by Rep. Darrell Issa, the committee chair at the faith-based hearing on Capitol Hill, because he deemed her unqualified. Issa said the panel was supposed to focus on religious freedom and Fluke is not a member of any clergy.
[...]
“Three thousand dollars for birth control in three years? That’s a thousand dollars a year of sex — and, she wants us to pay for it,” Limbaugh said, adding that high school boys applying to college should consider Georgetown. “They’re admitting before congressional committee that they’re having so much sex they can’t afford the birth control pills!”
The conservative radio host continued: “What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps.”
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 1, 2012 21:10:57 GMT -5
There are so many things wrong with what Rush is saying. There are legitimate arguments to be made about why the lack of a conscience exemption for institutions run by religions is wrong and violates the First Amendment. I mean, Ted Kennedy had no problem with the conscience exemption for institutions run by religions.
But gorram, Rush is stupid and loud and plays right into the hands of those who have an alternative opinion. Hey, let's be crass and make it about the users of the contraceptives, rather than about the GORRAM FIRST AMENDMENT. WHO CARES HOW MANY TIMES SANDRA FLUKE HAS SEX? And his stupid point about her getting paid to have sex is wrong. She's paying for the insurance, not the school.
Stupid Editeding 1950s & 1960s era tax code that made it worth it to have employers pay for insurance. None of this would be a problem if we bought our insurance individual like we do with every other type of personal insurance
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Mar 1, 2012 21:56:42 GMT -5
Agree with her position or not, this is absolutely appalling. Anyone on here who has any respect for a fellow Hoya should think this is a disgusting way for someone to talk about one of our own.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,906
|
Post by Filo on Mar 1, 2012 23:41:52 GMT -5
Rush is still alive? Seriously? He hasn't been relevant for years. Too bad he is getting national attention now, and only because of his typical outlandish boorish BS.
|
|
|
Post by flyoverhoya on Mar 1, 2012 23:49:12 GMT -5
Congratulations, Rush. Didn't think it was possible to say anything worse than what some commenters were saying today about Breitbart's death. I was wrong.
|
|
PhillyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by PhillyHoya on Mar 2, 2012 8:54:40 GMT -5
What keeps getting ignored in the whole Rush argument is that the woman in question is a lesbian. The pills are clearly not for sexual use.
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Mar 2, 2012 9:31:29 GMT -5
What keeps getting ignored in the whole Rush argument is that the woman in question is a lesbian. The pills are clearly not for sexual use. Exactly! They're clearly being used solely for political purposes.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Mar 2, 2012 9:34:43 GMT -5
What keeps getting ignored in the whole Rush argument is that the woman in question is a lesbian. The pills are clearly not for sexual use. Exactly! They're clearly being used solely for political purposes. If you put your fingers in your ears and scream loudly enough you may never have to hear a fact that goes against what you want to believe. Further, commentators were saying that Georgetown deans and some other employees DO get contraception coverage in their insurance. Where is the conscience issue there? To me, more than anything this is an indication of why we need a complete overhaul of our healthcare system. Why should your employer be deciding which aspects of health care you have access to?
|
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Mar 2, 2012 9:50:40 GMT -5
I can't decide whether Limbaugh has no concept of how birth control works or he decided that a large enough percentage of his listeners have a weak enough grasp that this was a good argument. Rush is still alive? Seriously? He hasn't been relevant for years. Too bad he is getting national attention now, and only because of his typical outlandish boorish BS. I can give you four hundred million reasons that Rush is still relevant.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,596
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Mar 2, 2012 10:25:19 GMT -5
Further, commentators were saying that Georgetown deans and some other employees DO get contraception coverage in their insurance. Where is the conscience issue there? Georgetown offers a choice of 4 medical insurance plans to its employees: Aetna Open Choice PPO, United Healthcare Choice Plus PPO, CareFirst BlueChoice Opt-Out Plus Open Access POS, and Kaiser Signature HMO. United does not cover oral contraception; the other three do.
|
|
|
Post by LizziebethHoya on Mar 2, 2012 11:15:13 GMT -5
Further, commentators were saying that Georgetown deans and some other employees DO get contraception coverage in their insurance. Where is the conscience issue there? So to recap, students over 26 [read: most Grad students] who don't make any money but pay ridiculous sums of money to Georgetown have realistically no other options for health insurance besides the one Georgetown plan that does not provide contraceptive coverage (Trust me, I tried as hard as I could to find health insurance outside of Georgetown but the deductibles were ridiculously high and I couldn't justify the risk), but employees who are hired and get paid by the University have multiple choices. As an additional point, my fellow students and I who are upset over this issue have been criticized for even going to Georgetown, when we could have chosen a non-Catholic law school. Yes, true, but do you think "contraception coverage" really factored into our minds when we chose Georgetown? Do you think it is even highlighted in any discussion of the Georgetown health insurance plan? No. This is opposed to Notre Dame, that very clearly notes in its admitted student materials that its health insurance plan doesn't cover contraceptives. Georgetown simply hides this fact from its admitted students. Lastly, mods, can you please change the subject of this thread? I understand it as a joke, and its funny, but it shouldn't be the subject of this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by LizziebethHoya on Mar 2, 2012 11:15:54 GMT -5
Dear Members of the Georgetown Community: There is a legitimate question of public policy before our nation today. In the effort to address the problem of the nearly fifty million Americans who lack health insurance, our lawmakers enacted legislation that seeks to increase access to health care. In recent weeks, a question regarding the breadth of services that will be covered has focused significant public attention on the issue of contraceptive coverage. Many, including the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, have offered important perspectives on this issue. In recent days, a law student of Georgetown, Sandra Fluke, offered her testimony regarding the proposed regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services before a group of members of Congress. She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student. In our vibrant and diverse society, there always are important differences that need to be debated, with strong and legitimate beliefs held on all sides of challenging issues. The greatest contribution of the American project is the recognition that together, we can rely on civil discourse to engage the tensions that characterize these difficult issues, and work towards resolutions that balance deeply held and different perspectives. We have learned through painful experience that we must respect one another and we acknowledge that the best way to confront our differences is through constructive public debate. At times, the exercise of one person’s freedom may conflict with another’s. As Americans, we accept that the only answer to our differences is further engagement. In an earlier time, St. Augustine captured the sense of what is required in civil discourse: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth. Let us seek it together as something which is known to neither of us. For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there be no bold presumption that it is already discovered and possessed.” If we, instead, allow coarseness, anger – even hatred – to stand for civil discourse in America, we violate the sacred trust that has been handed down through the generations beginning with our Founders. The values that hold us together as a people require nothing less than eternal vigilance. This is our moment to stand for the values of civility in our engagement with one another.
Sincerely, John J. DeGioia President Georgetown University
|
|
FormerHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,262
|
Post by FormerHoya on Mar 2, 2012 11:27:12 GMT -5
Did you factor in going to a Catholic school that would hold to Catholic doctrine?
I don't get the arguments, other than, "I want what I want, regardless of the reasoning behind it."
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Mar 2, 2012 11:39:52 GMT -5
Let's all be grateful that each of Rush's four wives apparently used contraception.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on Mar 2, 2012 11:43:03 GMT -5
Did you factor in going to a Catholic school that would hold to Catholic doctrine? I don't get the arguments, other than, "I want what I want, regardless of the reasoning behind it." You can't read very well, can you? Georgetown offers contraception coverage to its employees, so there obviously is no religious doctrinal objection. It is only the student insurance option that does not cover contraception.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,442
|
Post by TC on Mar 2, 2012 11:49:41 GMT -5
Did you factor in going to a Catholic school that would hold to Catholic doctrine? How is the inconsistent handling of contraceptive coverage in any way "holding to Catholic doctrine"?
|
|
|
Post by LizziebethHoya on Mar 2, 2012 12:04:58 GMT -5
Silly me, I thought "holding to Catholic doctrine" meant that Georgetown would support the health needs of its entire student body.
Birth control is used by SO many women for general health purposes, including hormonal balance. These "general health purposes" aren't supported by Georgetown's health care coverage. As Sandra Fluke pointed out, sometimes Georgetown insurance doesn't even cover birth control when its 100% necessary for the health and well being of the woman. This is simply wrong.
If a doctor provides a prescription for birth control, it should be covered. No questions asked.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 2, 2012 12:21:02 GMT -5
Silly me, I thought "holding to Catholic doctrine" meant that Georgetown would support the health needs of its entire student body. Catholic Doctrine is pretty clear about contraception. The Church is pretty clear about it's belief that contraception affects the spiritual health of those who use it. Your ignorance of that fact is not the Church's fault. That being said, offering three plans that include contraception to employees and no plan that does to students is such a Georgetown thing to do. SMH What conditions / diseases are treated solely / best by birth control? I keep hearing people say it's more than just birth control, but I've only heard of it used as a combo drug (ie you get it bc of the condition AND the desire to have sex)
|
|
PhillyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,016
|
Post by PhillyHoya on Mar 2, 2012 12:32:53 GMT -5
What conditions / diseases are treated solely / best by birth control? I keep hearing people say it's more than just birth control, but I've only heard of it used as a combo drug (ie you get it bc of the condition AND the desire to have sex) www.nyu.edu/shc/medservices/oral.contraceptives.html
|
|
|
Post by LizziebethHoya on Mar 2, 2012 12:39:00 GMT -5
Silly me, I thought "holding to Catholic doctrine" meant that Georgetown would support the health needs of its entire student body. Catholic Doctrine is pretty clear about contraception. You missed my entire point. And, I'm not "ignorant" as you described.
|
|