Also, I don’t think the people who pressured Rush’s advertisers were pretending to be outraged by Rush spending three days calling some young woman a slut. I think they were just plain outraged.
I think you may have lost track of how this issue got started.
If we are to “enforce and/or change laws to ensure this doesn’t happen” (your words,) then we should oppose the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2011 since it permits this to happen rather than making sure it doesn’t.
Are you saying you’re supporting Ms. Fluke’s opinion on this issue? I thought you started the thread because you disagreed with her?
Sure, and they can pay a fine/tax/fee/contribution. Just because the penalty isn’t death by torture doesn’t make it a free choice.
It’s like saying I can park my car in the middle of the road as long as I pay the ticketing and towing fees.
And it’s an all or nothing choice. Employers now don’t offer health insurance because they are nice. They are in competition with other employers and do so through market pressures.
I tend to agree that health insurance is a form of compensation. So if your plan at work doesn’t cover contraception, pretend that it is just like making $2k less per year, not having a few days of paid vacation, or the workplace being a few extra miles from home and otherwise budget accordingly for contraception.
If you can’t afford it, the government already provides it for free.
This is a solution to a non-existent problem, done for the SOLE purpose of pissing off religious conservatives. That’s why this board and the mainstream media love it.
Did you listen to Sandra Fluke’s testimony?
Yes, because pissing off the religious is such a WINNING electoral strategy in the USA…
There’s a really easy way to prevent the poor employers’ feefees from being hurt…institute single-payer health insurance nationally. Take the burden off those poor, poor job creators’ backs and give them one less thing to whine about. Amazing how no conservative, in the middle of this great lachrymose outcry about contraception, has offered up that solution.
This is the sort of remark one can only make without knowing a single factual thing about this issue.
Unlike pissing off women, which is brilliant. They are only 52% of voters, after all.
They wish, Santorum steps on social conservative land mines with Palin’s foreign policy acumen. He never says anything his constituents don’t already believe, but that he’s bold enough to frame it in naked devout Christian terms is a political liability for a presidential run that even his allies are starting to see. His view of the United States as a united faithful collective sullen by the few interloping liberal elites is a fantasy.
Rush is just a walk on role for a socially illuminating play already taking place.
Exactly. If they took a more moderate position, whose votes would the Republicans lose? It’s not like they’d vote for a Democrat. Individual candidates would suffer, but that’s their fault for letting themselves be measured by a litmus test.
All right, I’m confused. As I understand it, birth control is only free for everyone if the employer refuses to pay for a contraceptive-including plan. The birth control isn’t free–it comes out of your insurance payments. Heck, even if it is free, it comes out of that: the money has to come from somewhere, and you only have to offer it if the person has a plan with you.
Is there some other plan that makes them offer it to people who don’t get insurance at all? Because the way I understand it, they only have to offer it to people who use their insurance.
And it seems a stupid thing to try to piss off religious conservatives with, when, without the Republican rangling, this was just about contraception–something the mostly Protestant religious right in this country, along with most Catholics, have no problem with.
Who among us can state how much money they’re personally paying for birth control as grounds for a complaint?
Does this bill allow companies to refuse coverage of birth control pills that are needed for medical treatments? If so, it should be opposed.
For medical treatment, birth control pills (and any other pills) should be mandated by government to be covered by insurance.
For birth control purposes, in principle I’m not too sure I like the government forcing companies to cover birth control pills. In practice, it seems like good public policy for easy access to good birth control, so I can see why this mandate can make sense.
I’m a libertarian leaning conservative.
I suppose that I have mixed feelings. Hilariously bigoted comments (such as those calling a lady advocating for non-co-pay birth control pill access a ‘slut’ and ‘prostitute’) help to isolate and reveal the idiocy of right wing morons. I like that part. I was listening to Rush on Feb 29 and the days prior to that, so I heard his rants about government bureaucracy meddling in health care, mandating rules for businesses, increasing costs, further eroding personal liberty and freedom, people should buy their own birth control on the free market, religious freedom is being violated, ‘ObamaCare’ being far more expensive than initially projected, the Catholic Church sold its soul to the democrats during the Great Depression, Catholics are not totally innocent victims because they supported ‘ObamaCare’ during Congress’ wrangling before it became law, the evils of a culture of dependency, the perils of equality and equal outcomes, etc. Rush is a total windbag who exaggerates and scaremongers for the sake of ratings, but there are kernels of valid points in some of his rants. I do champion the free market. I do not think employers should get in the way of employee’s heath care, and I do not the government should mandate business to get involved. I supported a public option for health care, but not the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (aka PPACA or ‘ObamaCare’ law) that passed.
The Democrats and media have zeroed in on Rush’s most offensive and idiotic comments to frame the issue into a narrative of Republicans as a whole group are anti-women’s rights. That narrative is true among the majority of DC Republicans, unfortunately. I wish the debate would shift back to possibly offering a public option plan, enhancing individual choice, and repealing PPACA as a whole. PPACA does not sever the link between employers and health insurance, does not reduce health care costs, does not enhance the doctor-patient relationship, does not permit the free market to import more pharmaceutical products, and does not increase health choices for most people.
I do like the concept of women being able to obtain birth control (pills or otherwise) without co-payment. No complaints there. I am upset that employers are in a position to even be part of the debate.
Not as much as the asinine approach taken by leftists to create all this hoopla over nothing. Of course Rush takes the bait when he should have only spent 10 seconds to say “Im not apologizing for anything, now moving on…”
With all the truly salient remarks and positions espoused by actual government officials (there are so many I dont have enthusiasm or time to list them all - and that’s just over the past week), it’s really a shame this sort of thing is what interests people.
To right wingers, horrible things other right wingers say is something the left does.
Wooshed yourself there I see. The irony in your remark / link, is hilarious.
Yes, this is what I’m saying. Politely suggesting that contraception should be inaccessible, that gay people do not have rights, that killing Muslims for no apparent reason is a good foreign policy, etc, is evil. Our national obsession with bad words and “respect” is a distraction from this fact.
But that’s not what this is about. Conservatives support the government forcing employers to do things that go against their moral beliefs all the time. I don’t believe for a second that this is really about religious freedom as opposed to the longstanding conservative war on women’s rights, and forcing me to pretend it is, lest I be labeled “uncivil” and not engaged with in the conversation, is just another right-wing rhetorical tactic.
The world isn’t Wikipedia. I’m not going to “assume good faith” from people whom I know for a fact are engaging in bad faith. It’s easy to attack Rush Limbaugh for using a taboo word because everyone pretends to agree that it’s bad to use that word. It’s harder, but more accurate and necessary, to attack the entire conservative apparatus in America for having the same underlying attitude towards women as Rush Limbaugh does, but being smart enough to put a very thin layer of politeness on it.
What pisses me off is the left trying to character assassinate him for saying something of the sort that is said all the time, by both sides. Not specifically the slut thing, but my anger is more stemming from the fact that people on the left say flippant things like this all the time and get pegged as good entertainers, but when the radio spokesman of the right steps out of line, he gets jumped.
I love how people are saying they should pull Limbaugh, but will then go watch Family Guy, and see Seth Mcfarlane making fun of the period of the vietnam war when John Mccain was captured and tortured, and think that its just good television.
Having said that, I’ll jump off my soap-box.
On the one hand, I think there is a good argument to be had that is similar, more or less, to what Fluke was trying to say (even though I still don’t really agree with it). I found it amusing, however, that Fluke used the stories she did about her friends and acquaintances unfortunate situations as arguments for the need for free contraception. What she did would be the equivalent of me going before a political board to argue that abortion should be legalized, and letting my main argument consist of several examples of women who had become depressed after their abortion and so committed suicide. Such references, just like Fluke’s, are indeed tragic–all they do though is cloud a serious topic by using pure emotions rather then political and moral reason. I’d be willing to bet that now, after having seen Fluke’s speech, thousands of people out there will conjure those stories up in their mind when debating this in their respective circles, and because Fluke had basically been inferring that the people that refused to give her and her friends free contraception were deliberately putting her body and life at risk to save a buck, all of her nationwide supporters will have a tendency to slap the same caricature onto any dissenters.
Furthermore, I don’t quite understand how it can be reasoned that because the government, or otherwise, universities, are not forcing taxpayers to pay for contraception, that they are responsible for health risks involved. If this is really the sort of attitude that Fluke and friends had, then they wouldn’t be waving the “free contraception” flag. They’d be waving the, “free oil heating for families who are poor, free water, free basic groceries, etc etc” because all these, much more easily then contraception, can be said to be directly linked to the well-being of people’s bodies. This country isn’t Socialism-R-Us; not always extremely convenient for any and all, but regardless, we have chosen, and are more or less still choosing, to put the value of individual economic freedom and capitalism over having all of our needs supplied by the government.
…and on a personal note…if you can’t spend a few bucks a week on contraception…then your personal finance priorities probably need a re-evaluation.
How do you figure?
If I am already paying a health insurance premium, or receiving health insurance as compensation at work, haven’t I already done that?
No, NOT taxpayers.
I really, really wish that there were some mechanism that would give a non-fatal but extremely deterring electric shock to every person who perpetuates this (checks forum) um… error.