rush limbaugh

Open and general public discussions about things outside of Lakewood.

Moderator: Jim O'Bryan

Brian Pedaci
Posts: 496
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:17 am

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Brian Pedaci »

Where would the funding come from?? just asking..

Did you miss the part where I said the students at Georgetown U purchase their own health care plans, unsubsidized by the university? The university simply chose to eliminate contraceptive coverage from that plan.

As for Mr. Eisel's other query, I'll let Ms. Fluke's testimony answer that:
“In the media lately, some conservative Catholic organizations have been asking what did we expect when we enroll in a Catholic school?
“We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success.
“We expected that our schools would live up to the Jesuit creed of ‘cura personalis‘ – to care for the whole person – by meeting all of our medical needs.
“We expected that when we told our universities of the problem this policy created for us as students, they would help us.
“We expected that when 94% of students oppose the policy the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for – completely unsubsidized by the university.
“We did not expect that women would be told in the national media that we should have gone to school elsewhere.
“And even if that meant going to a less prestigious university, we refuse to pick between a quality education and our health. And we resent that in the 21st century, anyone think it’s acceptable to ask us to make this choice simply because we are women.
“Many of the women whose stories I’ve shared today are Catholic women. So ours is not a war against the church. It is a struggle for the access to the health care we need.
“The President of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that Jesuit colleges and the universities appreciate the modifications to the rule announced recently. Religious concerns are addressed and women get the health care they need. And I sincerely hope that that is something we can all agree upon.
“Thank you very much.”


P.S. Kate, thanks for the followup info. Being a married man of a certain age, I admit some ignorance as to the full availability of female birth control options. Perhaps someone better in-the-know can comment on whether these suggestions (written by another middle-aged guy) are appropriate substitutes.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

So, following her logic, I should be able to go to an Islamic or Jewish school and force them to serve pork.. Only in Amerika!!! Got to love liberalism!
Brian Pedaci
Posts: 496
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:17 am

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Brian Pedaci »

An interesting, if unoriginal, thought. Does eating pork help regulate your hormones, or prevent you from having an unwanted pregnancy?

Since you're bringing borrowed thoughts into the argument, in the interest of time, I'll just borrow my response. You can read it here, or here.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

You missed the point.. It absolutely has nothing to do with eating pork... and yes it was an original thought.. Sandra has a choice. She can leave G-Town and go somewhere else that subsidizes BC or even go to the local Target and get BC on the cheap..G-Town should not have to change because of a 30 year old activist.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

You missed the point.. It absolutely has nothing to do with eating pork... and yes it was an original thought.. Sandra has a choice. She can leave G-Town and go somewhere else that subsidizes BC or even go to the local Target and get BC on the cheap..G-Town should not have to change because of a 30 year old activist.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

https://liveaction.org/blog/nancy-pelos ... omiscuity/

But wait, Sandra Fluke counters, this isn’t just about sex—lots of women need contraception pills for other medical reasons. Georgetown technically covers such prescriptions, but:
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/sandra-flu ... -no-fluke/

prior to attending Georgetown she was an active women’s right advocate. In one of her first interviews she is quoted as talking about how she reviewed Georgetown’s insurance policy prior to committing to attend, and seeing that it didn’t cover contraceptive services, she decided to attend with the express purpose of battling this policy. During this time, she was described as a 23-year-old coed. Magically, at the same time Congress is debating the forced coverage of contraception, she appears and is even brought to Capitol Hill to testify. This morning, in an interview with Matt Lauer on the Today show, it was revealed that she is 30 years old, NOT the 23 that had been reported all along.
russell dunn
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by russell dunn »

I would like to go on the record here as one person who is not obsessed with
what happens in Ms. Flukes' pants, or under the bleachers.
kate e parker

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by kate e parker »

Brian Pedaci wrote:An interesting, if unoriginal, thought. Does eating pork help regulate your hormones, or prevent you from having an unwanted pregnancy?

Since you're bringing borrowed thoughts into the argument, in the interest of time, I'll just borrow my response. You can read it here, or here.


regulated hormones had nothing to do with fluke's argument. getting a catholic institution to provide birth control does. (btw a fifty cent condom would prevent pregnancy). and if you bothered to look into it, hormones that need regulated can be treated without birth control. birth control is one of many treatments.

also, the pork comparison has merit as no one would force a muslim institution to serve tasty, delicious bacon there. no one. but wait, how many muslim colleges are here in the good ol' USA?

while i dont agree with the catholics stance on birth control i do respect their right to
be against it. just like i respect practictioners of voodoo the right to sacrifice chickens (so sue me peta), just like i respect hebrews right to eat kosher, just like i respect muslims right to not eat pork (my lord they are missing out).

the separation of church and state....remember that?
kate e parker

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by kate e parker »

oh and here's a tip...to avoid an unwanted pregnancy DON'T HAVE SEX!

the unwanted pregnancy argument is crap as anyone can avoid an unwanted pregnancy. it's simple...keep your legs closed. but lemme guess, some nutty broad will come along and ask to me to pay for that as well
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

while i dont agree with the catholics stance on birth control i do respect their right to be against it.
Totally agree.. Liberals have never understood that tolerance is a two way street..
kate e parker

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by kate e parker »

Brian Pedaci wrote:P.S. Kate, thanks for the followup info. Being a married man of a certain age, I admit some ignorance as to the full availability of female birth control options. Perhaps someone better in-the-know can comment on whether these suggestions (written by another middle-aged guy) are appropriate substitutes.



you had me at "female birth control".

most guys wouldnt even know that there was birth control let alone that there were otptions for gender.

women, as a rule, have had to look out for themselves in this regard. so believe me i sypmathize with the cause. because i didnt have congress inviting me for testimony, i had to learn on my own. my findings in this area could be a college course all on its own (a public college of course).

i dont know where i'm going with this....i think that my signature speaks for itself

haha
kate e parker

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by kate e parker »

Stephen Eisel wrote: Totally agree.. Liberals have never understood that tolerance is a two way street..


youre assuming that libs even know that streets with names like tolerance even exist.
Stephen Eisel
Posts: 3281
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:36 pm

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Stephen Eisel »

Brian Pedaci
Posts: 496
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 1:17 am

Re: rush limbaugh

Post by Brian Pedaci »

*Sigh*

Really, read the transcript of her testimony. It wasn't me, me, me. She was making the effort to speak in general for a group of people about how they'd be negatively impacted by allowing employers and educational institutions an exemption from covering contraceptive medication.

Ad hominem attacks against the spokesperson for a group don't reflexively discredit the validity of the argument.
Post Reply