Babbling

[Nyanya]

---

dposse wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

redsilversnake wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

I think women's rights are important priorities. Just trying to get back to what I said in my previous post, birth control pills is the kind of contraception that Sandra Fluke is talking about and the use and amount of that is not based upon the amount of sex a woman has. I honestly feel this is basic high school health class stuff and I'm amazed that Fluke is getting criticized in this way.

---

I don't think anyone's going to question that women's rights are a priority. How are birth control pills a woman's "right"? What entitles them to birth control pills as a basic vital necessity?

---

A healthy sex life mostly free of the risk of pregnancy? The fact that certain birth control options help with certain medical conditions?

Also, as everyone else has said, options like the pill aren't something like, "I'm gonna have sex soon, I should prepare," because they don't work like that. It has to be taken on a regular basis. I don't know how much a batch costs, but considering the yearly cost given by Fluke, it's easy to see why she's not the only one who wants birth control covered by insurance.

---

By this definition, I should be able to call my congressman and demand condoms be covered by my health insurance, for me and every man with a healthy sex life.

I'm aware how they work, I don't understand why they are a "right". You still haven't demonstrated to me why they are a vital necessity and why women are entitled to them. I hear your reasons for why they may want them, but not why they are critical to them. My father's a transplant patient and his immuno-suppressant pills are only covered for three years before he has to pay for them himself. He needs those pills so his body doesn't reject his kidney and put him on dialysis, which is even MORE expensive. Where are these rights?

I think a woman should have access to birth control, and if she can afford it, she should be able to take advantage of their benefits. They are not necessary for a woman to stay alive. They are a commodity, not an entitlement like food stamps, and they should stay that way.

---

wow. you're...actually being serious. sigh. look, im a guy, but even i know that the pill is used for so much more then not getting pregnant. That was sorta the point of Sandra Fluke's testimony. It is indeed used for a womans health, and is necessary for it. Why not read up about it?

---

I have no doubt that they are used for women's health. I'm aware they help with painful periods and prevent cancer. Let me go back to my toothpaste analogy. Healthy teeth and gums have been linked to helping prevent heart disease. By this definition, toothpast is necessary for my health and should therefore be free. So should toothbrushes, floss, and mouthwash to ensure I have the tools I need to keep my teeth and gums healthy so I can prevent heart disease within myself. How likely do you honestly think this is?

Birth control is as necessary as toothpaste, and if I have to pay for toothpaste, why do women not have to pay for birth control? No one has explained why it is vital for a woman's life that she be on birth control. Link me to where a woman's well-being has been threatened because she has not been on birth control.

[DoseOfLaughter]

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

Again, ignorant comparison between birth control pills and condoms. And no, they are not just a commodity. It's medication needed for serious medical needs. Therefore, women's rights.

---

What serious medical needs? You still haven't answered that for me. Also, "serious medical needs" are not a right. You are not entitled to medication. You have to pay for it, either through a payment plan, upfront or if your insurance plan will cover it. Now, there are free clinics and things like Planned Parenthood that make it more reasonable for when you can't afford what one may need, but you are not entitled under US Law to have birth control.

Also, here's some food for thought. Birth control is preventative medication. Toothpaste is preventative medication. Where is my free toothpaste?

---

The woman that Rush Limbaugh bashed was trying to get birth controlled covered by the insurance because her friend needed birth control to help shrink ovarian cysts.

Birth control doesn't just stop pregnacies. One of my ex-girlfriends needed it for something involving her menstrul cycle.

[DoseOfLaughter]

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

dposse wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

redsilversnake wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

I think women's rights are important priorities. Just trying to get back to what I said in my previous post, birth control pills is the kind of contraception that Sandra Fluke is talking about and the use and amount of that is not based upon the amount of sex a woman has. I honestly feel this is basic high school health class stuff and I'm amazed that Fluke is getting criticized in this way.

---

I don't think anyone's going to question that women's rights are a priority. How are birth control pills a woman's "right"? What entitles them to birth control pills as a basic vital necessity?

---

A healthy sex life mostly free of the risk of pregnancy? The fact that certain birth control options help with certain medical conditions?

Also, as everyone else has said, options like the pill aren't something like, "I'm gonna have sex soon, I should prepare," because they don't work like that. It has to be taken on a regular basis. I don't know how much a batch costs, but considering the yearly cost given by Fluke, it's easy to see why she's not the only one who wants birth control covered by insurance.

---

By this definition, I should be able to call my congressman and demand condoms be covered by my health insurance, for me and every man with a healthy sex life.

I'm aware how they work, I don't understand why they are a "right". You still haven't demonstrated to me why they are a vital necessity and why women are entitled to them. I hear your reasons for why they may want them, but not why they are critical to them. My father's a transplant patient and his immuno-suppressant pills are only covered for three years before he has to pay for them himself. He needs those pills so his body doesn't reject his kidney and put him on dialysis, which is even MORE expensive. Where are these rights?

I think a woman should have access to birth control, and if she can afford it, she should be able to take advantage of their benefits. They are not necessary for a woman to stay alive. They are a commodity, not an entitlement like food stamps, and they should stay that way.

---

wow. you're...actually being serious. sigh. look, im a guy, but even i know that the pill is used for so much more then not getting pregnant. That was sorta the point of Sandra Fluke's testimony. It is indeed used for a womans health, and is necessary for it. Why not read up about it?

---

I have no doubt that they are used for women's health. I'm aware they help with painful periods and prevent cancer. Let me go back to my toothpaste analogy. Healthy teeth and gums have been linked to helping prevent heart disease. By this definition, toothpast is necessary for my health and should therefore be free. So should toothbrushes, floss, and mouthwash to ensure I have the tools I need to keep my teeth and gums healthy so I can prevent heart disease within myself. How likely do you honestly think this is?

Birth control is as necessary as toothpaste, and if I have to pay for toothpaste, why do women not have to pay for birth control? No one has explained why it is vital for a woman's life that she be on birth control. Link me to where a woman's well-being has been threatened because she has not been on birth control.

---

>mfw you just killed your own argument

[Nyanya]

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

Again, ignorant comparison between birth control pills and condoms. And no, they are not just a commodity. It's medication needed for serious medical needs. Therefore, women's rights.

---

What serious medical needs? You still haven't answered that for me. Also, "serious medical needs" are not a right. You are not entitled to medication. You have to pay for it, either through a payment plan, upfront or if your insurance plan will cover it. Now, there are free clinics and things like Planned Parenthood that make it more reasonable for when you can't afford what one may need, but you are not entitled under US Law to have birth control.

Also, here's some food for thought. Birth control is preventative medication. Toothpaste is preventative medication. Where is my free toothpaste?

---

The woman that Rush Limbaugh bashed was trying to get birth controlled covered by the insurance because her friend needed birth control to help shrink ovarian cysts.

Birth control doesn't just stop pregnacies. One of my ex-girlfriends needed it for something involving her menstrul cycle.

---

... did her friend choose to go to a school that didn't cover contraception too? Because if so, what a moron. I mean, I feel sorry for her and her cysts. I sympathize in a way, but what a moron.
 

[dposse]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/boxofficebuz/transcript-of-testimony-by-s
andra-fluke-48z2

“In the worst cases, women who need these medications for other medical conditions suffer very dire consequences.

A friend of mine, for example, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is technically covered by Georgetown’s insurance because it’s not intended to prevent pregnancy.

Unfortunately, under many religious institutions and insurance plans, it wouldn’t be. There would be no exception for other medical needs. "

----

There is so much misinformation floating around about what Sandra Fluke was talking about and about birth control in general. Please, read it. Just take the time. It isn't that long.

And then do yourself a favor and read up on it so you can't stop sounding like a parrot of every misinformed republican troll out there, repeating the same incorrect talking points out there and them smiling like they know what they are talking about.

[alucardsexyghost]

I wonder if his ship is sinking. I hope so.

[DoseOfLaughter]

Some people have no real choice in the schools they apply for - it really depends heavily upon what you can afford, where your sponsors will pay for you to go, and upon how far or close you wish to be to your family.


It also depends on what you want your degree to be in. Some people simply have no choice in where they go. Also, I'm pretty sure she didn't have those cysts until she was already enrolled. Calling her a moron is fairly retarded of you.

[Icarus27k]

You're full of ridiculous comparisons today. Birth control pills are mostly prescription medications, and toothpaste is a product.

[Nyanya]

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

dposse wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

redsilversnake wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

I think women's rights are important priorities. Just trying to get back to what I said in my previous post, birth control pills is the kind of contraception that Sandra Fluke is talking about and the use and amount of that is not based upon the amount of sex a woman has. I honestly feel this is basic high school health class stuff and I'm amazed that Fluke is getting criticized in this way.

---

I don't think anyone's going to question that women's rights are a priority. How are birth control pills a woman's "right"? What entitles them to birth control pills as a basic vital necessity?

---

A healthy sex life mostly free of the risk of pregnancy? The fact that certain birth control options help with certain medical conditions?

Also, as everyone else has said, options like the pill aren't something like, "I'm gonna have sex soon, I should prepare," because they don't work like that. It has to be taken on a regular basis. I don't know how much a batch costs, but considering the yearly cost given by Fluke, it's easy to see why she's not the only one who wants birth control covered by insurance.

---

By this definition, I should be able to call my congressman and demand condoms be covered by my health insurance, for me and every man with a healthy sex life.

I'm aware how they work, I don't understand why they are a "right". You still haven't demonstrated to me why they are a vital necessity and why women are entitled to them. I hear your reasons for why they may want them, but not why they are critical to them. My father's a transplant patient and his immuno-suppressant pills are only covered for three years before he has to pay for them himself. He needs those pills so his body doesn't reject his kidney and put him on dialysis, which is even MORE expensive. Where are these rights?

I think a woman should have access to birth control, and if she can afford it, she should be able to take advantage of their benefits. They are not necessary for a woman to stay alive. They are a commodity, not an entitlement like food stamps, and they should stay that way.

---

wow. you're...actually being serious. sigh. look, im a guy, but even i know that the pill is used for so much more then not getting pregnant. That was sorta the point of Sandra Fluke's testimony. It is indeed used for a womans health, and is necessary for it. Why not read up about it?

---

I have no doubt that they are used for women's health. I'm aware they help with painful periods and prevent cancer. Let me go back to my toothpaste analogy. Healthy teeth and gums have been linked to helping prevent heart disease. By this definition, toothpast is necessary for my health and should therefore be free. So should toothbrushes, floss, and mouthwash to ensure I have the tools I need to keep my teeth and gums healthy so I can prevent heart disease within myself. How likely do you honestly think this is?

Birth control is as necessary as toothpaste, and if I have to pay for toothpaste, why do women not have to pay for birth control? No one has explained why it is vital for a woman's life that she be on birth control. Link me to where a woman's well-being has been threatened because she has not been on birth control.

---

>mfw you just killed your own argument

---

Do you know how many f**king things claim to prevent cancer? Eating healthy prevents cancer. I want organic food covered by my insurance. Exercise prevents cancer. I want a gym membership covered by my insurance. Let me rephrase in a way you won't even misconstrue my argument. What woman needs birth control TO STAY ALIVE.

[DoseOfLaughter]

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

dposse wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

redsilversnake wrote:

---

Nyanya wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

I think women's rights are important priorities. Just trying to get back to what I said in my previous post, birth control pills is the kind of contraception that Sandra Fluke is talking about and the use and amount of that is not based upon the amount of sex a woman has. I honestly feel this is basic high school health class stuff and I'm amazed that Fluke is getting criticized in this way.

---

I don't think anyone's going to question that women's rights are a priority. How are birth control pills a woman's "right"? What entitles them to birth control pills as a basic vital necessity?

---

A healthy sex life mostly free of the risk of pregnancy? The fact that certain birth control options help with certain medical conditions?

Also, as everyone else has said, options like the pill aren't something like, "I'm gonna have sex soon, I should prepare," because they don't work like that. It has to be taken on a regular basis. I don't know how much a batch costs, but considering the yearly cost given by Fluke, it's easy to see why she's not the only one who wants birth control covered by insurance.

---

By this definition, I should be able to call my congressman and demand condoms be covered by my health insurance, for me and every man with a healthy sex life.

I'm aware how they work, I don't understand why they are a "right". You still haven't demonstrated to me why they are a vital necessity and why women are entitled to them. I hear your reasons for why they may want them, but not why they are critical to them. My father's a transplant patient and his immuno-suppressant pills are only covered for three years before he has to pay for them himself. He needs those pills so his body doesn't reject his kidney and put him on dialysis, which is even MORE expensive. Where are these rights?

I think a woman should have access to birth control, and if she can afford it, she should be able to take advantage of their benefits. They are not necessary for a woman to stay alive. They are a commodity, not an entitlement like food stamps, and they should stay that way.

---

wow. you're...actually being serious. sigh. look, im a guy, but even i know that the pill is used for so much more then not getting pregnant. That was sorta the point of Sandra Fluke's testimony. It is indeed used for a womans health, and is necessary for it. Why not read up about it?

---

I have no doubt that they are used for women's health. I'm aware they help with painful periods and prevent cancer. Let me go back to my toothpaste analogy. Healthy teeth and gums have been linked to helping prevent heart disease. By this definition, toothpast is necessary for my health and should therefore be free. So should toothbrushes, floss, and mouthwash to ensure I have the tools I need to keep my teeth and gums healthy so I can prevent heart disease within myself. How likely do you honestly think this is?

Birth control is as necessary as toothpaste, and if I have to pay for toothpaste, why do women not have to pay for birth control? No one has explained why it is vital for a woman's life that she be on birth control. Link me to where a woman's well-being has been threatened because she has not been on birth control.

---

>mfw you just killed your own argument

---

Do you know how many f**king things claim to prevent cancer? Eating healthy prevents cancer. I want organic food covered by my insurance. Exercise prevents cancer. I want a gym membership covered by my insurance. Let me rephrase in a way you won't even misconstrue my argument. What woman needs birth control TO STAY ALIVE.

---

>Has no argument

>Goes on tyrade

>Is clearly going down with the ship

*Salute*

[Nyanya]

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:
Some people have no real choice in the schools they apply for - it really depends heavily upon what you can afford, where your sponsors will pay for you to go, and upon how far or close you wish to be to your family.


It also depends on what you want your degree to be in. Some people simply have no choice in where they go. Also, I'm pretty sure she didn't have those cysts until she was already enrolled. Calling her a moron is fairly retarded of you.

---

Oh bull f**king crap. You have no choice but to apply to GEORGETOWN? Give me another crack, Dose.

Calling her a moron, bad. Calling me a retard, good. Your parents taught you well.

[GinaSzanboti]

Except for Plan B, which isn't intended for ongoing contraception (and is crazy expensive for what it is), all birth control pills are prescription only.

[DoseOfLaughter]

Actually, I never called you retarded. I claimed your actions are retarded.


Pretty big difference.

[Nyanya]

... I can't believe I fell for this. This isn't even an issue.

Well, thanks everyone. I lost this one. It was fun. We'll do this again, sometime?

[DoseOfLaughter]

---

Nyanya wrote:

... I can't believe I fell for this. This isn't even an issue.

---

*Plays taps. Continues to salute*

[Icarus27k]

After watching Jon Stewart take on Limbaugh's comments just now, I can safety say anyone who comes close to having the same opinion that Limbaugh has on this issue is being mind-numbingly idiotic.

Insured birth control for women is somehow indicative of an outrageous sense of entitlement? It's somehow going to cost you yourself money if Georgetown University includes contraception in its privately bought student health insurance plans? Women who want birth control insured are just #### that can't stop having sex so much?

What bizzaro world does one have to live in to think these are legit opinions?

[dposse]

---

Nyanya wrote:

... I can't believe I fell for this. This isn't even an issue.

Well, thanks everyone. I lost this one. It was fun. We'll do this again, sometime?

---

it is now. and the irony here is, the GOP brought it into the limelight. it went from "look, the President is infringing on your rights again!", to "How can we make this all go away?". C'mon, take pride in this! It was the GOP who is bringing up dozens of bills in state and the federal government trying to change womens rights. The party of small government, requiring a doctor to stick a large probe inside a woman before she has an abortion. Personhood. and now birth control. Culture wars, second round. DING DING!

[Master-Debater131]

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:
Some people have no real choice in the schools they apply for - it really depends heavily upon what you can afford, where your sponsors will pay for you to go, and upon how far or close you wish to be to your family.


It also depends on what you want your degree to be in. Some people simply have no choice in where they go. Also, I'm pretty sure she didn't have those cysts until she was already enrolled. Calling her a moron is fairly retarded of you.

---

If she was able to go to Georgetown you can sure as hell bet she had other options for going to school so that arguement is a bunch of BS.

She knew what the schools policy was the day she applied.  She knew they didnt cover BC and yet she applied anyways.  Its her own #### fault.  It isnt the job of other people and orginizations to bend to your will just because you think you are some special princess.

Shes nothing but an annoying #### who thinks the world needs to bend to her will.

[dposse]

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:

---

DoseOfLaughter wrote:
Some people have no real choice in the schools they apply for - it really depends heavily upon what you can afford, where your sponsors will pay for you to go, and upon how far or close you wish to be to your family.


It also depends on what you want your degree to be in. Some people simply have no choice in where they go. Also, I'm pretty sure she didn't have those cysts until she was already enrolled. Calling her a moron is fairly retarded of you.

---

If she was able to go to Georgetown you can sure as hell bet she had other options for going to school so that arguement is a bunch of BS.

She knew what the schools policy was the day she applied.  She knew they didnt cover BC and yet she applied anyways.  Its her own #### fault.  It isnt the job of other people and orginizations to bend to your will just because you think you are some special princess.

Shes nothing but an annoying #### who thinks the world needs to bend to her will.

---

someone sounds butthurt that Rush got his ass handed to him after getting caught for beating up a young girl live on the air. don't worry, im sure after Rush gets cancelled, he'll have a spot with Glenn Beck.

[Icarus27k]

The only times you are ever allowed to call a woman a "princess": 1. when she's a member of an actual royal family or 2. when she's five.

But continue making comments about women's issues.

[Master-Debater131]

Its funny as hell that you people think Rush got "handled".

How many "apologies" has he offered over the years? How many times have people pulled adds from him?

And hes still there exposing the left and doing what he does best.

Im about as worried about Rush losing his job as the world ending this December.

[Icarus27k]

That's right. You're a radio host, and you just had fifteen advertisers cancel their sponsership of your show, and you've been pulled off two local stations?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uplwTun2vEY/TdGFv2njnnI/AAAAAAAAALg/uJD
IDrNiKcw/s1600/Just-A-Flesh-Wound-m...

[westpark]

---

Icarus27k wrote:

That's right. You're a radio host, and you just had fifteen advertisers cancel their sponsership of your show, and you've been pulled off two local stations?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uplwTun2vEY/TdGFv2njnnI/AAAAAAAAALg/uJD
IDrNiKcw/s1600/Just-A-Flesh-Wound-m...

---

As big as that is I guarandamntee u he has 15 other wingnut advertizers just waiting to pick up the slack.

Read several comments today where Republicans were #### @ Limbaugh for apologizing -- calling it capitulation.

[dposse]

---

westpark wrote:

---

Icarus27k wrote:

That's right. You're a radio host, and you just had fifteen advertisers cancel their sponsership of your show, and you've been pulled off two local stations?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uplwTun2vEY/TdGFv2njnnI/AAAAAAAAALg/uJD
IDrNiKcw/s1600/Just-A-Flesh-Wound-m...

---

As big as that is I guarandamntee u he has 15 other wingnut advertizers just waiting to pick up the slack.

Read several comments today where Republicans were #### @ Limbaugh for apologizing -- calling it capitulation.

---

except its a domino effect. All those advertisers will see staying with Rush (ignoring all those complaints) is agreeing with Rush. They won't want to stay to save their own public image/getting far away from the backlash.

[Icarus27k]

That might be wishful thinking. I heard one Limbaugh supporter today say that Hilo, Hawaii has over twelve different radio stations and that means at least one of them will pick up Limbaugh's show after being cancelled on that one particular station. When you look up the radio stations, the one that cancelled Limbaugh is the only talk radio station. The others are music, and a public station.

I sense some false confidence among Limbaugh's supporters.