You have to love the sincerity of the JSGs of our society who at once decry the lack of civil discourse, tell others that their opinions don't matter and besmirch others with whom they disagree as knuckle-draggers. That takes quite the talent - or perhaps hypocrisy would be a better, and more accurate, descriptor.
PrintSmith wrote: You have to love the sincerity of the JSGs of our society who at once decry the lack of civil discourse, tell others that their opinions don't matter and besmirch others with whom they disagree as knuckle-draggers. That takes quite the talent - or perhaps hypocrisy would be a better, and more accurate, descriptor.
No, honesty and accuracy will do. Sincerity is nice, but honesty is better.
The knuckle-draggers have shown themselves for what they are. The only hypocrisy is the hateful Right that still denies the fact that they are hateful.
There is nothing hateful in refusing to provide insurance coverage for something which places one into a state of mortal sin LJ. If the "lady" wishes to have someone else foot the bill for her contraception she should not have chosen to attend a private Catholic university and picked another instead. Either that or made a different decision on what form of contraception she chose. The most effective form of contraception is actually free to everyone and not just the person who isn't footing the bill for the cost of the chemically induced sferilization they wish to have but don't want to pay for.
Once again...(as usual)...you miss the point that the lady wasn't talking about "birth-control"...She was talking about a treatment that would have prevented her friend from losing an ovary. (Her friend, by the way, happened to be a lesbian...So, I don't think she was in need of "birth-control.")
And once again, I don't give a sh*t if you think it's a "mortal sin" to provide a woman with a medication that could save her ovary just because someone else could use it to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.
Get your Church out of MY State... And your superstitious crap out of other people's health care.
I'm quite sure of this was a medication for men we wouldn't be having this discussion. If there was a medication that prevented men from getting prostate cancer or having ED, but also was a male contraceptive there would be no demand to eliminate coverage.
Why can't men and government just stop meddling in women's health issues?
NEW YORK — A flower company is the seventh advertiser to pull its ads from conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh's radio program in reaction to his derogatory comments about a law student who testified about birth control policy.
ProFlowers said Sunday on its Facebook page that it has suspended advertising on Limbaugh's program because his comments about Georgetown University student Sandra Fluke "went beyond political discourse to a personal attack and do not reflect our values as a company."
The six other advertisers that say they have pulled ads from his show are mortgage lender Quicken Loans, mattress retailers Sleep Train and Sleep Number, software maker Citrix Systems Inc., online data backup service provider Carbonite and online legal document services company LegalZoom.
How's that hate and vitriol working out for ya, Schmuck?
Actually instead of companies boycotting Rush, shouldn't these women boycott Catholic universities that deny them free birth control. If enough students take their checks for 20K elsewhere, maybe Georgetown will change thier policies.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.