How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 RUSH to Judgement - sanitized version.   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

RUSH to Judgement - sanitized version.

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


25 posted 03-08-2012 05:38 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Did you miss the definition, Ron; or decide that the definition deserves a pass?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


26 posted 03-08-2012 07:06 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

What I resent is the omission of relevant facts that any reasonable
man would think were within this ostensibly intelligent woman’s knowledge
at the time she was giving testimony.  Now I imagine this to be
common practice among actual, (and probably aspiring), lawyers  to accomplish
their goal, but that doesn’t make it right.  And if you get caught out you
suffer consequences;  you don’t get to claim protected minority status
much less sugar and spice and everything nice regardless.


.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


27 posted 03-08-2012 08:40 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Your definition, Bob, is irrelevant. Which I suspect is exactly what you would have told Limbaugh if he had tried to defend himself by contending Fluke really did have frequent sex outside of marriage. The question has never been one of perceived truth but rather one of taste.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


28 posted 03-09-2012 01:19 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


     I almost, but not quite, agree, Ron.  For very good reasons.

     "My definition" is indeed irrelevant.  It's irrelevant because it's personal, and so what.  You either aren't aware or are purposefully blurring the boundaries between "my definition" as something that that fool Bob Kaven drummed up and "the definition," which is what I made a point of using.  "The definition" is different because it is an attempt to reach "consensual reality."  That thing out there that we all live in which enables us to have rules and to live in together.  You are enough of a thinking man to know very well what I'm talking about here, I do believe; and I'm a little taken aback that you'd think I wouldn't be able to see the slight of hand that was involved in your response.

     Indeed, It’s because Mr. Limbaugh so flagrently junked the consensual notion of acceptable behavior that he ended up in dutch.  He knew it, which is why he tried to backpedal, and you know that he’s keenly aware of these things, because taste is a matter of consensus as well.  He is a monster who tries to pretend he is not.  There are a lot of them around.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


29 posted 03-09-2012 01:31 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

quote:

The truth is that Mr. Limbaugh is a monster ...


A statement, Bob, that is no less distasteful than the one Limbaugh made about Fluke. You seem to be doing precisely that which you are condemning.



     Whether my statement is more or less distasteful is in this case your opinion, Ron.

     The distinction is that Mr. Limbaugh is a paid player in the political fields who abuses people for large amounts of money, and his sexual fantasies about what he would like to do with Ms. Fluke and the people who disagree with him are sponsored by people who should know better.  Mr. Limbaugh is using the polite fiction that his sharing of these sexual fantasies with the nation is political free speech and not a form of sexual assault.

     The fact that Mr. Limbaugh has chosen somebody who is not a sponsored and seasoned political player to use as an outlet for this particular form of address that has become a trademark of his does not define him as a regular guy, Ron.  It doesn’t even define him as somebody who’s engaged in the rough and tumble of political discussion.

     In the rough and tumble of political discussion, one might toss an occasional name or make a charge thgat would be true or not true.  Claiming ownership of somebody else’s sexual life is different than that.  It is a particular form of sexual play that pretends a sort of sexual intimacy that is not there.  It is one sided sexual play on the airwaves,  I think it may be legal,l but it does not fall under the banner of behavior between consenting adults, Ron.  One of them is not consulting, and the other is intruding with their explicit sexual fantasies anyway.

     Did you actually listen to what Mr. Limbaugh said? Not only about Ms. Fluke but about any women that Mr. Limbaugh in his own somewhat illogical fashion considers to be using birth control that “He” is paying for?  I’d be interested in knowing whether you actually heard what Mr. Limbaugh actually said.  I would be surprised, if you had, to find you in disagreement with me.

     My opinion about Mr. Limbaugh is an opinion about a man who is a political operative, who makes his living by offering opinions about political events, yes.  None of those things would have been enough to have me catagorize him as a monster.  There are other Republicans, such as Mr. Rove, that I simply do not like and whose tactics I find difficult to swallow, and I would expect that there would be Democrats that many Republicans would find similarly difficult.  That seems to be the nature of political operatives in general.  So what?  For the most part, I can get along very well with the species so long as they confine themselves to preying on each other.

     Mr. Limbaugh cannot seem to confine himself.

     I checked the dictionary, finding it difficult to believe that the answer was so basic and straighforward.  It was.  The definition suggests, Ron, that Mr. Limbaugh is in fact a monster.  

     The dictionary is not a slithery tricky liberal plot.  It’s actually pretty basic and strtaightforward and descriptive.  The part that’s difficult is that it’s accurate.  Blaming me for noticing that it’s accurate seems to be a case of blaming the messanger.  I think more people should have noticed.  It’s not as though he’s actually been hiding someplace, he’s been doing what he’s been doing right out in the open for years and years and people have been cheering him on for it.

     I’m just pointing out what nobody wants to admit.

     And, respectfully, the heck I’m doing what I’m condemning Mr. Limbaugh for doing.  Mr. Limbaugh is a very rich man with access to 15 million listeners who periodically choses underdogs to abuse, frequently on charges that are spurious.  He then uses his power to do his best to humiliate them in from of his public for money and public approbation.    

     Perhaps you would like to tell me exactly what piece of that I have duplicated?

     I am calling Mr. Limbaugh a monster because he fits the definition.  I even made a point of showing the definition so people didn’t have to take my word for it.

     I hear you saying my comment is distasteful.  What I don’t hear is you saying which part of the definition is wrong.  I find what is monsterous to be distasteful fairly frequently as well.  The fact that Mr. Limbaugh is a virtual poster boy for the definition is even more distasteful.  Do you imagine that I somehow arranged this with the folks at the dictionary publisher?  I assure you, this is a matter of Mr. Limbaugh’s free choice.  Nobody consulted me in the process; Mr. Limbaugh choses to do the things he does, near as I can tell, on his own.  He is responsible for what he is.

     I do take responsibility for noticing.  Many of the rest of you were cheering and throwing money and, for all I know, may still be.  For me to say that seems to be simply telling the truth.

    Ms. Fluke did not and does not fit the definition of slut or prostitute as far as I am aware.  Nor do the combat veterans of the middle eastern conflicts of recent years who believed the war in Iraq and Afghanistan a bad idea  fit the dictionary definition of coward so far as I understand it.  I feel that it’s probably a waste of both our time and attention for me to check, but, of course, should you wish me to, I’ll do so.  

     Actually, I think I’m doing a pretty good job of offering a cold look at Mr. Limbaugh and at offering a dispassionate estimation of what he’s doing and who he is.  

     Frankenstein’s monster, you know, seemed like a pretty decent guy, if you read the book with any attention.  There’s nothing about being a monster in itself that has to be terrible.  I think it’s folks like Mr. Limbaugh that give monsters a bad name.  The closest thing I would give to a concession is to say that I feel like growling now, which sounds from me more silly that monsterous.  I say, Grr.  I don’t demand videos of pooir women’s sexual experiences.

     Bob:  Rush::  Grrr:   Videos of poor women’s sexual experiences.

     The difference in a nutshell.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


30 posted 03-09-2012 04:36 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
"The definition" is different because it is an attempt to reach "consensual reality."

I know the definition of monster, Bob. I also know the definition of slut. Both of them are subjective, both of them are derogatory, and neither of them grant you or Limbaugh license to wield them as weapons.

You can go on and on (which you did) about your belief that one definition fits and the other doesn't ("as far as I am aware"), but again, the issue isn't about perceived truth, but rather about taste. More pointedly, perhaps, it's about practicing what one preaches.

Rush Limbaugh is NOT a politician, Bob. He has neither sought nor seeks public office of any kind, making you free to listen to him or not as you choose. Rush Limbaugh, Bob, is Sandra Fluke with more money and a wider audience. He's what Sandra Fluke may well become some day if her political activism is successful. She shouldn't get a free pass on personal insults just because she's young and relatively unknown, and he shouldn't have a target painted on his forehead just because he's old and prosperous. They are the same. Personally, I think both can be criticized for things they've said and done, but neither of them should be characterized by silly name-calling.

quote:
Indeed, It’s because Mr. Limbaugh so flagrently junked the consensual notion of acceptable behavior that he ended up in dutch.  He knew it, which is why he tried to backpedal ...

There is wisdom in recognizing our mistakes, Bob. And courage in admitting them.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


31 posted 03-09-2012 08:20 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Disagree pretty much right down the line, Ron.

     Rush is as much a politician as James Carville.  A social activist is not the same as a politician.  Rush gets paid for his political activities.  Ms. Fluke does not get paid for being a social activist.

     If you're going into the business of predicting what people are going to do in ten years, it's not very far from getting search warrants for searching their houses to look for the first signs of criminal activity as well.  Maybe you can prevent the next speeder from cutting you off on your commute and jail him or her before the thought forms as well.  There was a time that we considered that sort of thing the kind of activity that they did in Russia or Germany.  I guess, now it's simply nipping those pesky critics in the bud.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


32 posted 03-09-2012 09:34 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


Despite the far-left media’s attempts to portray law student Sandra Fluke as a brave voice against a supposed “war on women”, the alternative media has been hard at work informing the American public of the truth behind Fluke’s sudden rise as media darling of the far left.  With more and more learning that Fluke is in fact a 30-something self-avowed women’s rights/contraception activist who CHOSE to attend one of the most elite universities in the United States has greatly lessened her appeal to mainstream Americans.

When it was further learned (LINK) that birth control was not only easily available to Georgetown law students – but in fact FREE for lower income students, the premise of Fluke’s rehearsed portrayal began to truly crumble.

Now add the even more recently revealed fact that Sandra Fluke’s agenda is being directly controlled by none other than Anita Dunn – former Obama White House communications director!  This relationship gives a strong suggestion that the entire Sandra Fluke “controversy” was planned and initiated by Barack Obama operatives from the outset – with ample assistance then given by their supporters within the liberal media.  
So with Sandra Fluke’s credibility in a spiral,  and yet more egg on the biased face of the liberal media, those advertisers who had fled Rush Limbaugh for fear of a public backlash are now scrambling to once again enjoy the profitable benefits of having their products being given an audience of millions each day of the work week:

Sandra Fluke and her alleged “contraception crisis” is proving little more than a calculated fabrication created by supporters and recent operatives of the Obama White House.
http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/03/09/advertiser-begs-limbaugh-to-take-them-back-limbaugh-says-nope/
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


33 posted 03-09-2012 11:57 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     "It was learned?"

      "It was learned that there's going to be a great upset at the race track in the third at Suffolk Downs on Good Friday.  Inside sources — important sources close to the favorite herself — have revealed that the favorite has been going out on frequent late night drinking binges and that she has been breaking training and has been seen in the company of Clydesdale Studs.  Important money knows that betting money on her is a waste of time, and that the really smart money should be going onto the the less well  known thoroughbred Upper Class Twit which has been running further back in the pack in a series of races earlier in the year."

     Also, "Pay no attention to the little man behind the curtain."

     Drop all actual well researched sources of information and follow our advice.  Have we ever steered you wrong before?  Trust us.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


34 posted 03-10-2012 12:55 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
FREE for lower income students

There's that word again Mike - FREE.

Sandra Fluke was arguing that contraceptives should be included in the health care plan that she pays for as part of her tuition fees. You seem to be arguing that someone else should pay for them., namely tax payers.

Is that what you're saying?

If so I think you're wrong and I'm pretty sure Limbaugh would too.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


35 posted 03-10-2012 04:18 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Thank you, Grinch.

     Student health plans are normally part of the "Fees" section of the cost of a college education, as in "Tuition and Fees."  Students normally have to pay this themselves.  If they are fortunate enough to have parents who can afford to pay this money, their parents, do.

     I believe that such family planning services should be available free, and that there are any number of excellent reasons for supplying these services as a part of a student's undergraduate and graduate experience.  Among them is that the the education is something that should be protected as much as possible,.  Having to worry about pregnancy and std's should be kept in the background as much as possible to permit this to happen.

     The law of the land has mandated that women be given  an equal shot at  education, and science has given them for pretty much the first time in history a reasonable chance at achieving that shot.  Law mandates that women have a pretty much equal chance at admission to the schools that supply this education.  Women who wish to take advantage of the possibilities of birth control can now have a chance at adding choices to the destiny that biology has provided for them.

     This is an example of a religion trying to undo that gender's attempt to find an alternative path for those of its members who wish to follow it.  

     If it were doing so in a straightforward way, I would still disagree with what that religion is doing here, but I would say it was an exercise of Freedom of Religion and call it a clash of principles.  The Catholic Church and the repressive view of women it's representing in this case — The Catholic Church does not have an entirely repressive view of women, which is why I qualify my statement by saying "in this case" — and the freedom of women to choose their own path, which can be as traditional as they wish or as non-traditional as they wish.

     Ms. Fluke doesn't seem to be insisting that every woman in the county go on the pill.  It wouldn't be necessary or appropriate — duh! — but in some cases, by golly, even in that little Georgetown community, it probably is.  It simply thinks it can get away with providing a standard of care that is less than what its students need.  Not because they shouldn't have it, but because it will discourage women from being students there.  What's the phrase I hear from the Right in cases like this"  Oh yes, "If they don't like the rules, they shouldn't be here."
    
     Exactly!  

     And this, I argue, is in fact discrimination against women, and is against the laws of the United States of America, and may well be grounds for a massive gender bias suit against the Catholic Church.  

     In the United States, you may be entitled to believe what you want, but when it comes to Equal Treatment Under the Law in an institution that accepts any form of federal funding, an entirely different set of standards comes into play.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


36 posted 03-10-2012 11:48 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Not because they shouldn't have it, but because it will discourage women from being students there.

Really, Bob? According to who? You? Do you really feel women will be discouraged to attend that university because they might have to pay  for their own birth control pills? That's your argument??

Good luck with that one
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


37 posted 03-10-2012 11:56 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Sandra Fluke was arguing that contraceptives should be included in the health care plan that she pays for as part of her tuition fees.

So since contraceptives are not part of the health care plan she now receives, she is saying that the university should include it and cover the fees, which she claims are 3,000 a year. So multiply the three grand times the amount of female students and that's what she feels the school should cough up just because gals don't want to assume the responsibility of taking care of their own birth control responsibilities. Nice..

Isn't it a little interesting that we haven't heard from other Georgetown female students backing her? WHere is the army backing this crusader for female rights and demands? What I have seen, and posted here, is fellow female students basically claiming she is a wacko who doesn't speak for them.

This was all a democratic bear trap that they got their own foot caught in....as usual.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


38 posted 03-11-2012 03:31 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Certainly the University should cover contraception as part of their student health plan.  This would require an increase in the student fees to cover the difference or a redistribution in the current student fees already collected.  Women would be covering a substantial part of those fees themselves, perhaps all of them, depending on how the fees were assessed.  I imagine everybody has to pay fees to allow sports to go on, if Georgetown is like many other schools; so possibly everybody might be charged a larger student fee rate.  I simply don’t know.

     I don’t have any kids, and I have to pay taxes for schools.,  Some things just work that way.  Ask me about oil depletion allowances.

     Some people will cost $3,000.00 a year.  Some people won’t make any use of contraception services at all.  Rather than assuming that everybody will cost $3,000.00 a year, I imagine it’d probably be a better idea to take bids on what it would cost to cover the services that the student body would require.  Insurance companies do that from hospitals in the name of capitated care.  The level of care is generally okay and the insurance companies seem to make money on it.  Considering the Catholic Church is in the Hospital Business, it should be able to cut itself a pretty fair deal and even, if it works the deal well, end up making a profit on the deal.  As you said above, “Nice.”

     As for the business of not hearing from other Georgetown students backing her,  I couldn’t say.  I could ask you a question, though, and I think I will.

     I haven’t actually looked to see if I could find other female Georgetown Students backing her.  While just browsing, I did run across this

quote:
http://studentactivism.net/2012/03/03/limbaugh-apology-makes-it-obvious-he-has-no-idea-what-sandra-fluke-said/




because I was checking to see some stuff about the cost of the birth control Ms. Fluke was talking about.

     Did you actually check to see if there were women at Georgetown who agreed with what Ms. Fluke said, or did you get so carried away with what the Right Wing press was reporting that you failed to check?  I’m reasonably sure that there are women who agree with Ms Fluke there, and that you’ve been busy looking at people who agree with you, and that there are articles there about people who agree with Ms. Fluke.  

     What do you think?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


39 posted 03-11-2012 04:00 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


The woman misrepresented reality
pure and simple.


.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


40 posted 03-11-2012 06:39 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
So since contraceptives are not part of the health care plan she now receives, she is saying that the university should include it and cover the fees

No Mike. She's saying that she'd like contraceptives included in the health insurance plan that she pays for as part of her tuition fees.

Personally I don't think that's what health insurance was designed for but at the end of the day, if that's what she wants and the insurance company are willing to supply the service, it's really none of my business.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


41 posted 03-11-2012 09:40 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No Mike. She's saying that she'd like contraceptives included in the health insurance plan that she pays for as part of her tuition fees.

Actually. she is not saying what she would like. SHe is saying what she demands. There's a difference. We would not have the dog and pony show if it were simply a "like".

if that's what she wants and the insurance company are willing to supply the service, it's really none of my business.

Nor mine but this Democrat-led performance was designed to have it be everyone's business.

Certainly the University should cover contraception as part of their student health plan.  This would require an increase in the student fees to cover the difference or a redistribution in the current student fees already collected.  Women would be covering a substantial part of those fees themselves, perhaps all of them, depending on how the fees were assessed.

Then it would defeat her purpose, Bob. Her claim is that she can't afford the small amount contraceptives cost now. Do you think she would be appeased the increase in her student fees to cover them? WHy not just cut out the middleman and get them yourself? She has made no claim that SHE needs special contraceptive needs that require high-priced items but she does state that SHE can't afford what she does need, which is pennies, as has been shown. You are pretending this is a valid demand instead of the Democrat carnival it really is...not many people are being fooled by it. Even the Dems have seemed to back off from it lately.

I imagine everybody has to pay fees to allow sports to go on, if Georgetown is like many other schools; so possibly everybody might be charged a larger student fee rate.  I simply don’t know.

If you were to check, you would not have to say "possibly" or claim you don't know after making a statement. Sports are pretty well self-supporting, Bob, especially in the larger universities. They receive millions in ticket sales, merchandise sales, and the mecca or all college sports - television rights.  Perhaps if female students were to get together to create a "Contraceptive Calendar", selecting a scantily-clad Georgetown lassie holding up a box of contraceptives to highlight each month, they too could be self-sufficient enough to have them paid for, without having their student fees raised. Hey, we could have something there!!


Did you actually check to see if there were women at Georgetown who agreed with what Ms. Fluke said, or did you get so carried away with what the Right Wing press was reporting that you failed to check?

SInce you ask so nicely, I'll respond, Bob. Not only did I check, I also noticed that there has been nothing reported. If the fellow students were behind this movement she is pushing, don't you think it would make the news? Colleges are pretty good at protesting, demonstrating and demanding when what they feel are worthwhile causes are being challenged. WHere are they? The mainstream media would fall all over themselves showing the fellow student support if there were any.  I posted one link showing that there are at least some who distance themselves from her, saying she does not speak for them. WHere are the ones that say she does? MIA. That should tell you something. She is simply a democrat stooge at this point, someone chosen to fill a role the dems could use to get their "Republican war on women" going to detract from the fact that Obama stuck his hand in the fire with this one.

The link you provided discusses Limbaugh's language, not her crusade. We all agree on that, even Limbaugh, so there is no point to be made from it.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


42 posted 03-11-2012 10:50 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Actually. she is not saying what she would like. SHe is saying what she demands.

Fine Mike but whether it's what she'd 'like' or what she's 'demanding' it doesn't make any real difference - it's still got nothing to do with you, me or Limbaugh.

In fact to apply Limbaugh's analogy correctly the insurance company would be the prostitute, Sandra would be the John and the University is the pimp. Limbaugh, rather ironically, simply ends up being a voyeuristic pervert.

quote:
Perhaps if female students were to get together to create a "Contraceptive Calendar", selecting a scantily-clad Georgetown lassie holding up a box of contraceptives to highlight each month, they too could be self-sufficient enough to have them paid for, without having their student fees raised


You could go a tad further Mike and insist that they video their sexual exploits and put them on the internet or you could try to convince the insurance company that it would make long term financial sense to absorb the costs. It shouldn't be that hard a sell given that they seem to have already worked that one out for themselves - the majority of health insurance plans already include contraceptive cover.

By the way, do you also have an issue with all the women who already have contraceptive cover or is it just students?

.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


43 posted 03-11-2012 11:27 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

The issue isn't with women having contraceptive coverage, Grinch, students or not. The issue is that Obama is forcing Catholic institutions and organizations to provide contraception and abortion pill coverage when it is against their longstanding, well-known, stated religious beliefs. No one is preventing these women in Catholic institutions and organizations from practicing birth control or getting abortions but the Catholic institutions and organizations are morally opposed to providing it or paying for it, directly or indirectly through a mandate on their insurance provider, which Obama promised them would never happen when he was lobbying their support for Obamacare. The Fluke fiasco is just Obama's lame attempt to reframe the discussion. It's not working.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


44 posted 03-11-2012 11:45 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thank you, denise.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


45 posted 03-11-2012 01:00 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
The issue is that Obama is forcing Catholic institutions and organizations to provide contraception and abortion pill coverage when it is against their longstanding, well-known, stated religious beliefs


I thought the issue was whether Limbaugh was correct when he claimed that students want him to pay for their contraceptives Denise and whether the criticism levelled towards him is justified  - hence the thread title.

quote:
Catholic institutions and organizations are morally opposed to providing it or paying for it


Then there shouldn't be a problem in this case Denise because the students are paying for it through their tuition fees and Obama's compromise solution would allow the insurers to deal directly with the students for contraceptive cover.

The only bugbear would be if the university self-insured, in which case they always have the option of getting out of the non-profit insurance business and concentrating on their core function - supplying education.

.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


46 posted 03-11-2012 02:33 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


The only bugbear would be if the university self-insured, in which case they always have the option of getting out of the non-profit insurance business and concentrating on their core function - supplying education."


Does that mean students would then go out and get their own insurance?

After all at the core students are customers,
not employees.


.

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


47 posted 03-11-2012 03:36 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Does that mean students would then go out and get their own insurance?


Why not?

The tuition fees could be reduced by the amount designated for health insurance and the students could make their own arrangements. I'm sure an enterprising insurer would be happy to compete for their business.

.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


48 posted 03-11-2012 04:51 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

[Edited - Ron]

[This message has been edited by Ron (03-11-2012 09:37 PM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


49 posted 03-11-2012 04:55 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

[Edited - Ron]

[This message has been edited by Ron (03-11-2012 09:37 PM).]

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> RUSH to Judgement - sanitized version.   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors