sandra fluke

[sevenofnine]

what do you think of her thinking that contraception should be well provided or subsidized by the taxpayers.

maybe im wrong, but is she like crazy.,
what does a condom cost,
if you or the guy can't afford that what are you going to do if anything goes wrong, like you get pregnant or need to see a doctor.

im old school, meaning you take care of your own shit, and don't ask or expect anyone to help you out.
and sure, some things are subidized by tax payers, education health care etc,

but you really fucking thing the governement should be buying you a condom,

why should we stop there, maybe the next time i see my lady that i see, i should ask for a tax reciept
it would be nice.

 

[*emmanuelle]

you really fucking thing the governement should be buying you a condom,

Sandra Fluke never mentions condoms in her testimony.

The main point of her testimony was about a lesbian friend of hers that needed hormonal birth control to treat poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (a very painful illness that can be kept at bay with progesterone BC like DepoProvera)

 

[bcneil]

Sandra Fluke never mentions condoms in her testimony.

The main point of her testimony was about a lesbian friend of hers that needed hormonal birth control to treat poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (a very painful illness that can be kept at bay with progesterone BC like DepoProvera)

I think 7of9 only got around to Rush Limbaughs conclusions.
Where she is just a slut, that has premarital sex.

 

[vancity_cowboy]

As for condoms, drop by any sexual health clinic in the states, like planned parenthood, and you can likely get them for free.

hopefully they're not factory seconds!

isn't it you that says

The bitterness of poor quality lingers long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.

 

[Devo]

Sandra Fluke never mentions condoms in her testimony.

The main point of her testimony was about a lesbian friend of hers that needed hormonal birth control to treat poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (a very painful illness that can be kept at bay with progesterone BC like DepoProvera)

We wouldn't want to deny free birth control for the millions of lesbians with poly-cystic ovarian syndrome.

 

[DavidMR]

We wouldn't want to deny free birth control for the millions of lesbians with poly-cystic ovarian syndrome.

Jesus Christ.

 

[jesuschrist]

Sandra Fluke never mentions condoms in her testimony.

The main point of her testimony was about a lesbian friend of hers that needed hormonal birth control to treat poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (a very painful illness that can be kept at bay with progesterone BC like DepoProvera)

Yes she was saying how birth control pills were essential for a woman's health, so the government should provide them.

Providing things essential for women's health shows respect for the special place of women in this society. Women are disempowered and we have not truly achieved women's equality still.

This is why:

Tampons are also essential for women's health, so the government should provide that as well.

Midol is also essential for women with severe cramps, as it renders them incapable of functioning. The government should provide that too.

Breast cancer is a leading cause of death in women, and the government has a moral responsibility to provide breast examination screening and surgery free of charge.

Ovarian cancer and surgery for cysts as a preventative measure against cancer is necessary for women's health. The government's duty is to provide that.

Unwanted pregnancies take a toll on women's health, not to mention that the unwanted child if it were born would have a shitty life. It's the government's responsibility to provide for the costs of family planning, including abortions if necessary.

Related to pregnancies, if a female has made the decision to have a child, yet another right of womanhood, but she does not have enough education to provide for the child, the government ought to pay for her university level schooling sufficient for her to find a good paying career, and provide for her child while she is being educated.

Women are more prone to the harmful effects of STDs, and many men are carriers of them and pass them on to women. As women are constantly being victimized by men, and society at large, the government has a deep moral duty to provide care free of charge to women who have been victimized by STDs, especially since they most likely got them from men.

All women deserve to have orgasms, and the government should provide courses in how to have them as well as any devices like vibrators to women without cost to them.

And without toilet paper, women would have dirty anuses and be at risk of bacterial infections, which is particularly dangerous for women given the proximity of the anus to the vagina. The government should provide that too.

Also, without proper dental care, women's quality of life would be degraded... the government should provide that too.

Once equality has been achieved, we'll realize that not only are women special, but so are men. At that point the government can also pay for all of men's special needs, like the high rates of colon cancer treatment, the need for men to eat copious amounts of meat, and the need for men to have sex with many women.

 

[Devo]

Jesus Christ.

I wonder why alinburnaby calls this guy a troll? I shouldn't have brought it up because he will start whining again.

 

[Flanders]

The cost is nothing.

Spoken like a true socialist...

And wrong. With the government involved, the cost will be substantially more than nothing...

 

[Flanders]

What is the cost of a database to keep track of long guns? The government should be focused on the education side of things. Teach them to fish, rather than giving them fish. Let people take responsibility for themselves. I am never a fan of more gov't involvement when it is not necessary...

Let's keep the quote in context.

Al,

What is the monthly cost of a prescription x 12 months x 36 years (age 14 until 50)?

What is the cost to the system of raising a child in poverty versus a middle class home to the age of majority? Add on the cost to the system of the lifetime system costs of one person chronically on welfare x the percentage of persons raised in poverty that go on to live in poverty in adulthood. This would be a low ball cost because there could be multiple children, but is workable for comparison sake.

 

[myselftheother]

Oh Come On. Birth Control pills cost nothing. I buy my niece's on my monthly trip to the drugstore to fill prescriptions. What the issue really is is that the American Social Safety Net is so parsimonious that a person on welfare or food stamps can't afford even their monthly food and rent. If the government doesn't want poor people to be creating children, they have to make it so a woman can get her birth control pills - even when she doesn't have shelter or food.The cost is nothing. Especially when put against the cost of having another child on welfare or food stamps.

Birth Control pills are also prescribed for some other medical issues, but that is secondary.

Yes, agreed....just highlighted the most important point that lots of you seem to have missed. Just a few hundred per year as a preventative measure, rather than 100's of thouands for unwanted children borne into poverty to continue the cycle. Gives women more of a choice about children, rather than a sentence.

 

[Flanders]

Allan,
All your calcs are indeed correct. And if that was indeed the cost to the taxpayers, then I am all for it.

Problem is, you can multiply your numbers by about 100 to cover the "real" costs once the government is administering things. THAT is what I have a problem with. Folks who's gut instinct is "have the government look after it" whothout acknowledging the real cost of this. It's pretty easy to spend other people's money without really thinking about it...

 

[Karl Blues]

There is a fundamental misunderstanding about this issue. Sandra Fluke never asked for Govt (taxpayer) to pay for birth control pills. She asked for insurance companies to cover these pills (not condoms) for possible medical reasons. She asked the Govt to require this coverage from private insurance companies. .

Please see the attached video, around the 1:50 mark (with an open mind hopefully)

 

[DavidMR]

Many Govt programs run at far lower overhead and administrative costs than the private sector. Example are ICBC and the Canada Pension Plan.

The reason is that with a single provider there are efficiencies, just as there are (for the most part) in power and communications utilities. Notice that even though cable TV is privately owned, it's normally a monopoly in any one area.

 

[DavidMR]

We wouldn't want to deny free birth control for the millions of lesbians with poly-cystic ovarian syndrome.

This is what I consider real trolling. Making offensive comments directed at some one else's real concerns.

Pointing out succinctly that someone who does that is expressing attitudes that are off the meter for all but the most anti-social and insensitive people is not trolling.

 

[Devo]

If a women is using contraceptives to treat medical issues than we have a totally different issue. Lets not lump (no pun intended) pregnancy prevention with medical treatments. I don't think anyone would have an issue paying for someones legitimate medical treatment which involved birth control pills.

There is also a huge white elephant in the room that nobody is addressing. Think back to when you were a 20 year guy. If your GF would have said to you we cant have sex because I can't afford birth control would you have simply shrugged your shoulders and walked away. Of course not! You would have gotten that money somehow. Are we to believe that the guy is not contributing to the cost of birth control?

And if we take this even further I love how Obama has intentionally switched the discussion to Republicans denying women contraception. George Stephanopoulos planted the seed about a month ago in a Republican debate, where he attempted to fan the flames of an issue that had been settled 30 years ago. The candidates were perplexed at why George was bringing up this non issue. Now we know why.

Obama simply cannot have the news headlines discussing the 15 trillion deficit, the high price of gas,the high level of unemployment. If you were a Martian visiting the USA for the first time, you would think that the number one crisis was free birth control.

If that same Martian visited Canada and watched the news, he would think that we were on the brink of anarchy due to a Socialist name Bob crying wolf about telephone calls.

 

[Devo]

This is what I consider real trolling. Making offensive comments directed at some one else's real concerns.

Pointing out succinctly that someone who does that is expressing attitudes that are off the meter for all but the most anti-social and insensitive people is not trolling.

This is what I call a textbook example of slandering another member when they have a different opinion than yours. It is also a textbook example of someone twisting and contorting your words to fit their narrative. This is further a textbook example of one member stalking another member, in an attempt to bait them into an altercation.

 

[*emmanuelle]

Lets not lump pregnancy prevention with medical treatments.

Well I guess you're on Sandra's side, because that's exactly what the new bills (the bills she was protesting) would do - they would lump medical treatments and pregnancy prevention together.

From the transcript:

"Sen. Blunt’s amendment, Sen. Rubio’s bill or Rep. Fortenberry’s bill there’s no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy"

 

[bcneil]

Let's start with the Canada Child Tax Benefit. There is an online calculator and I've filled in 1 child, single parent, 0 income
http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/gncy/bdgt/2011/qa08-eng.html


Then we go to BC Social Assistance http://www.eia.gov.bc.ca/mhr/ia.htm and we use rate "C" which is a single employable person with 1 child.
So, $375.58 for Support and $570.00 for shelter per month plus $123.50 for the child.



The maximum monthly comes out the same if you use the "Hardship Tables" also http://www.eia.gov.bc.ca/mhr/hardship.htm

Then you have the Supplements http://www.eia.gov.bc.ca/mhr/gs.htm
and the Health Supplements http://www.eia.gov.bc.ca/mhr/hsp.htm

Birth Control Pill prices are here http://www.birthcontrolbuzz.com/
The ones I buy my nieces are $56.70 for 3 months or $226.80 for a year or $8164.80 for 36 years

I get $1359.49 per month or $16313.88 per year or $587299.68 for the 36 years

Over the 36 years that is a difference of $579134.88 for being "morally correct" and "saving" the cost of giving birth control to women.

That's for a single woman with 1 child on welfare. Note, she doesn't get enough to easily afford birth control pills after paying for food and shelter. That means if she has sex she is going to have another child. While the cost of being "morally correct" is not as high for the second and the following children, it is going to be about $300.00 a month.

In the USA, the cost of "moral correctness" is an entire culture of single mothers who are themselves the children of single mothers. In fact, since the rules say that a woman with a toddler can't be required to "job search", the system is set up to guarantee that each single mother will produce another child ever 2 - 3 years.

I think we need to include the actual medical cost of having a baby in the states.
My buddy and his american wife had a child. They have great jobs and suitable medical insurance.
When she got pregnant, the medical bills just for seeing a doctor, having ultrasound, and delivery in the hospital.....was the price of a nice new car. All paid for by insurance.

I work as a pension actuary, but also took many courses in insurance.
Insurance companies are all for free birth control, because it is by far the cheapest option.

All these clowns talking about how its their tax money....blah blah blah....
Yeah these good christian families pumping out 6 kids, no problem wanting to have these medical expenses all covered.
Poor woman needs a couple hundred a year for the pill.....not with our money.

 

[Devo]

Well I guess you're on Sandra's side, because that's exactly what the new bills (the bills she was protesting) would do - they would lump medical treatments and pregnancy prevention together.

From the transcript:

"Sen. Blunt’s amendment, Sen. Rubio’s bill or Rep. Fortenberry’s bill there’s no requirement that such an exception be made for these medical needs.For my friend and 20% of the women in her situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription. Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy"

Isn't Blunt's amendment specific to insurance coverage?

Its a red herring because these services are already being provided at little to no charge. Sandra Fluke is attempting to use this issue to create controversy where none exists. Does it not make you suspicious that she promotes organizations like "Media Matters"?

Incidentally when you watch the mainstream news the narrative is not the treatment of an illnesses but rather the Republicans want to deny poor women birth control. I think that you would even agree with me the issue of medical treatment as it relates to contraception, has been intentionally suppressed to discredit the Republicans.