First time I went on birth control pills it was for non-contraceptive reasons. And like Clod, I was around 15 or 16 at the time.

It's actually quite common for the pill to be used for non contraceptive medical reasons. It helps a lot of, particularly young, women manage unusually painful and debilitating menstrual pains, for example.

But again - Obamacare is clear in that it takes the stand that preventative coverage is included in Obamacare - that is to say, health insurance plans meeting the minimum standard of coverage are required to cover preventative services, including birth control.
Why, then, is birth control being singled out as a problem? Why not checkups or immunizations or whatever?

The only organization being compelled is the insurance companies who now need to provide coverage with a minimum standard of care that has raised to cover preventative services including birth control... and the POINT of insurance as a principle is that when "ooh, a prescription costs a lot, some people can't afford to have it"... the insurance company steps in to help. It's the same principle by which "ooh, chemotherapy costs a lot, some people can't afford to have it" so instead of saying "only rich people can survive cancer", we say "insurance coverage should be expected to cover them".

So therefore, to attack birth control coverage as YOU or TAXPAYERS or THE GOVERNMENT paying to give women birth control - which, as a supporter of a single-payer system, i think the government SHOULD - is flat out false. And so, the issue becomes, why should birth control be considered differently than any other medicine or prescription, when it comes to the mandated minimum standard of care? And if not, why single out birth control as a problem unless it's specifically with the intent of slut-shaming and trying to treat women differently - worse - than men?

I'm just really astounded at the objections to covering a prescription drug that is used to either a) treat a medical condition or b) prevent an expensive medical condition.

It's insurance. That is what it is for. Just like dental insurance pays for bi-annual cleanings and molar sealings and health insurance pays for physicals, pap smears, prostate and breast exams. It is to prevent a potentially expensive issue later on. OR, to cover treatment of an illness.

The cost of covering birth control doesn't even come close to prenatal care, delivery, and 18 years of insuring an additional dependent. Not to mention taxpayer funded education and other civic expenses associated with another citizen.

If I have to pay for your insulin injections and glucose testers because of your eating habits, your rehab due to your drinking habits, your surgeries due to your lousy driving habits, your diet pills due to your excessive eating habits and your effing Viagra so you can continue to go have sex on demand...then why shouldn't my birth control be covered so I do NOT have to have a baby that I am unprepared for??

Makes no sense to me.

Stormie Stormie Stormie :facepalm:

Don't bring the larger picture, you know...reality, into this argument. This is only for highly idealized calls for personal responsibility that has repeatably been shown to never work.

Break out your tinfoil hats, Birthcontrol and abortions will always be available to the well-off. Saddling a person with a child is a great way to keep that person from moving up the economic ladder.

There's a local branch of a very popular Christian cult in my town. One of their M.O.s is to encourage lots o' babies for the members of the cult, at the same time education is generally discouraged and avoided. The upshot is, since you've given away all your worldly possessions before joining, and you now have a family of 7 or more to support, and you lack rudimentary skills like reedin and ryten and math. You aren't likely to up and leave.

The cult is more overt, but the same thing happens in our country.

Please put the tinfoil in the recycling bin when you are done.

Yesterday, I read someone claim that birth control pills are a recreational drug.

Yeah, but women deserve those pains because they tempted Adam with the apple...

Well, in a manner of speaking...

Sadly, the awesome Ricky Gervais standup bit about Adam and Eve and the Serpent has been removed from youtube. Whereas, the rest of the same entire bloody show is still there.

Don't worry, the snake's all right. :lol:

There's always Viagra, paid for by insurance.

Ironic, eh?

Dicks are the the way they are, 'cuz they are born that way. Pricks are that way 'cuz they get off on it. I am an insufferable prick.

Is there something I've posted in the last 8 years that would make you think I don't have a problem with Obamacare? I don't care at all about contraception. I'm pretty sure my insurance plan covers it. I don't have an issue with anyone using it and if their insurance plan covers it they should absolutely take advantage of the savings available.

I have a problem with private companies being villified for choosing to cover some procedures and medicines but not others. They are private companies and so long as they are not discriminating by race, religion, or sex then they can do just about anything they want in my opinion. Either they will be competitive and thrive or they will falter in that highly competitive industry.

To make it very very clear Ibram, so you don't feel the need to rephrase what I've posted in a lame attempt to accuse me of some horrible thoughts. I don't support Obamacare.

I think the issue is that some people feel contraceptive medication is excluded on the basis of it being morally wrong and based on religious beliefs.

That's my impression of it anyway.

no, THIS is the real problem for most people. Your right to free religion doesn't mean you can discriminate based on sex, which contraception coverage does. We as a nation decided that we needed health care reform, and even if you dont want it, it's the LAW. why, then, should an insurance company be able to arbitrarily break the law just because they don't agree with birth control? Why does birth control not deserve to be just as legally protected as any other basic prescription coverage that we've also collectively coded into law that they must provide?

I appreciate that you're asking a question; however, when you have to repeat it after there's been ample time for a response, it's always a good idea to reexamine your question [I've done written test question validations including proctoring target audience pretests and post pretest statistical analysis]. Your question presupposes that checkups or immunizations or whatever have not previously been singled out as problems.

Checkups are covered. A thorough checkup would include a DNA analysis for predisposing factors of disease and other conditions. That information, whether it turns out to be an accurate prognosticator or not, could be used to segregate people and have dramatic consequences in their everyday lives. Checkups are covered to a degree; or, it becomes a problem. It's always a matter of degree.

Immunizations are covered. There have always been implied associations between immunizations and side effects whether they were accurate correlations or not (e.g. MMR or MMR plus thiomersol containing vaccines and Autism). The degree to which immunizations are covered rely on their statistical safety. Even though statistically safe, they are still held suspect via the media necessitating reassuring ad campaigns for vaccinations. It's always a matter of degree.

Contraceptives are covered. They can be used to treat other conditions in addition to preventing pregnancy. They are statistically safe. The degree to which they are covered depends on political influence. It's always a matter of degree.

The applications for insurance covered contraceptives are subject to scrutiny just as many other drugs (e.g. recreational marijuana VS medical marijuana) and procedures are for various reasons whether for prevention or treatment. The people affected would be better served if you presented arguments in support of the degree of application you desire rather than false analogies.
I'm delighted to see that you're taking responsibility for your actions. :p:
I luv U 2.
(even though I've seen Codfobble's brain before morning coffee in a first draft reply)

On a hunch, I did a Google image search for Sandra Fluke. I figured there might be some "motivational posters" about her.

Here's a bit of what I found. The Freepers and dittoheads have been having fun. Rush tells them what to think, and they fall over themselves to follow his lead.

Attachment 37695
Attachment 37696
Attachment 37697
Attachment 37698

This is just a small sample of what's out there.

If Sandra Fluke is so terrible, you'd think they'd give her all the free contraceptives she wanted just to keep her from reproducing.

How about that Ann Romney jumping on the bandwagon and telling everyone she doesn't consider herself wealthy so she won't lose free contraceptives either.

Bzzzzzzzzzzzt! False.

Read the actual quote:
Still feel the same?

She's saying she has no friends?

@classic,

Yes, I still feel the same, my statement was a joke just like my other statement above it.

That quote from AR seems like a stream of consciousness that she forgot was falling out of her mouth. I kept waiting for her to come to her point...but she never really did. I can sort of assume what it is, but I could be wrong.

It's true, I realized I had completely misunderstood your post and changed my reply accordingly. This is why some people think I'm smart, it's because they're not as quick to click on new posts as you are. :)

Or maybe it says something about the (alleged) intelligence of the people who consider you smart?

We'll stop there before we get to the people who consider you sexy.

back to Rush Limbaugh ...

I was going to post on this subject in the humor thread, or the tasteless jokes thread with the punch line about his apology delivered by the head ditto himself: "It wasn't personal."

ha ha ha

I laughed myself sick over that one.

she's a slut, she's a prostitute, and since we're all paying for your sex, video tape it and send me a copy.

or words to that effect. That sounds really personal to me.

Ah but it wasn't. In order for it to be personal, Rush would have to give a shit about her, which he clearly doesn't. The only reason she was used, is because she was the one testifying. The whole tirade was against Obamacare, the left, Democrats, et al.

Ah, but it wasn't. He went after her personally, not the policy of covering birth control on your insurance. That's the whole problem. He thought that what he said wasnt personal... it WAS.

Same as Maher and Shultz... they're all media WHORES! :eek:

I've been saying this for years, now this woman is writing legislation about it. She's my new hero. Thanks for the article, c-man!

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...second-opinion


Bwaaahahahaaaaaaa! Brilliant lady! Let's watch this go over like a lead balloon. I said recently that if men were subject to sneaky cancer like Ovarian cancer they would move heaven and earth to find better ways to detect and treat it. We ain't come that far, baby.

So yes, make the men jump through all sorts of hoops to get their Boner Pill. Really, think of their health. We must watch out for them.

Only if you accept Limbaugh's premise that the only things he said wrong was two words.

Nope - sorry. All three of them did the same thing.
Rush is just getting way more attention from it.

That "same thing" was what, exactly?

Calling a woman a slut on the air.

I was called a slut to my face once.
(sorry, back to some of the original discussion, I've been away)
I felt it was justified.

In hindsight it wasn't. I'd had sex, that was all. My choice of partner was poor (and the sex wasn't good) but the person who called me a slut was hurt and disappointed because he wanted to get jiggy with me and someone else got there first.

The person who has called me a bitch the most is my own mother, who throws in words like spiteful and selfish as adjectives.

Anyway.

I started using contraceptives at 16 for non-medical reasons.
I now have a contraceptive implant, on the NHS, and don't have sex.
I am both a slut and a drain on resources.

Y'know I have conservative friends who are always saying to me 'liberals do the same kinds of stuff'. Maybe I don't go out of my way to look for it, but is there this kind of stuff out there for Coulter or any of the prominent conservative women? Is there any of this out there for a conservative woman whose only claim to fame is giving testimony before Congress? My take on this is that Coulter and other public figures seek attention and are compensated for being public figures. As such, they are more 'fair game', although I would find those pictures offensive even if Coulter were the subject.

I seriously think that the extreme right is better at expressing hatred then the extreme left. That might be my bias, and as a liberal I am willing to be proven wrong.

Rich, just get outside your norm. There is plenty of hatred posted from ALL sides on most any political page - just read the comments.

God that's apt. Apt!

Also has everyone forgotten their Classics?

Lysistrata, ladies!

No birth control you say? Ok, no sex for you.

Cool. Does that mean if I offer a woman birth control she'll have sex with me?

WHY DID I NOT KNOW THIS SOONER?

How carefully did you follow this story and how invested were you in it? If you spent more than five minutes concerned about it...

YOU ARE A SLUT

Not a traditional slut, but a political slut! Here's why!

1) There was no actual issue to begin with. The reason why we know this is that it happened at a congressional hearing.

1a) Congress are the biggest sluts in the land. They regularly hold hearings on things they have absolutely no actual interest in or even the ability to change, such as steroids in baseball. Federal legislators think they run everything and are the most important people in the world. The entire point is for concerned "leaders" to have their faces shot on TV looking all concerned. The process is a fake debate and the result doesn't really matter and nothing ever actually happens. It's all just sluttery.

2) Sandra Fluke is a slut. Not a traditional slut, but a political slut. The reason why we know this is that she claimed in front of a congressional hearing that

People took the time to look into this statement and found that it was nigh impossible to spend $1000 a year on contraception. Depo shot = about $600/year, oral contraception = $200-600/year, implant = one-time $800 lasts 5 years, sponge = $4 per event, condoms = $1 per event.

1000 condom uses per year would make Ms. Fluke an actual slut. The simpler explanation is that she's a political slut. It is Not Okay to suggest that someone having enough sex to generate $3000 in contraceptive expenses is a slut... only because everyone on all sides knows full well that $3000 is a carefully-constructed lie, and lying is standard practice in political sluttery. And that's why...

3) Rush Limbaugh is a slut. This is well-understood by all sides. The entire raison d'etre of the Rush Limbaugh Program is political sluttery. It's professional wrestling. It's well-understood to be fake. Even when the show covers actual issues, it does so in as slutty a style as possible and so when the issue is SEX and there is politics, the fake debate will become the show's main concern. And what helps them get a huge audience is the barking opposition...

4) The people claiming outrage over Rush's statements are sluts. They know all of the above, but cannot help jumping into the fray and claiming to be outraged. But there is no actual outrage. Nobody's face is actually turning red over the idea that Rush Limbaugh would call someone a slut. There are no marches planned and even sponsor boycotts are sort of fake. But by the way...

5) The sponsors leaving the Limbaugh program are sluts. They knew when sponsoring the program that Limbaugh was a slut and the entire reason you sponsor it is to gain from sluttery. They made a calculated decision that leaving the show would get them more publicity and interest than staying on the show. Sure enough the first jumpers got a round of coverage and that led to a second round of jumpers trying to get the same coverage. But what they didn't realize was...

5a) The sponsors staying on the Limbaugh program are sluts. The ones staying have done the calculus that their name will now be dragged around and they will gain attention and sales from that. Really well played, Carbonite! And the reason this works is...

6) The Media are all sluts. They know all of the above; they're in the game and they know full well that their job is to get the crowd all worked up for the professional wrestling match. But the only reason they can actually do this is...

7) You are all sluts. You fell for it, because you love it. In the back of your mind you know it's professional wrestling and it's far more fun to play this shit than to actually study issues and think about real issues to debate. It's pretend-productive. It makes you think you're engaged.

~

On a basic level "slut" is just a fake accusation that you are sex-positive. And ironically, if you use contraception, being sex-positive is entirely fine. "Slut" should not be the pejorative term that it is, acting slutty is not even necessarily negative, and BigV has actually marched to defend that principle.

The Cellar: Sluts R Us