Collegienne complains that so many coeds are having sex, their Catholic school must pay for contrace

[lily]

Condoms are for more than just preventing pregnancy. I'm surprised that in this day and age, full grown single men would promote not wearing condoms. Teenagers or guys in their early twenties? Irresponsibility is not surprising.

A better option is doing something that's 100% sure.... that's what I do, just abstain altogether. (until marriage) Although I can already predict the reaction I'll get for daring to even mention something so unrealistic and outrageous.

[Sparkly Mary]

Does anyone here wear a wetsuit when getting a back massage? Why bother having sex wearing a rubber then?

Pregnancy and disease prevention for two reasons...

[Sparkly Mary]

Condoms are for more than just preventing pregnancy. I'm surprised that in this day and age, full grown single men would promote not wearing condoms. Teenagers or guys in their early twenties? Irresponsibility is not surprising.

A better option is doing something that's 100% sure.... that's what I do, just abstain altogether. (until marriage) Although I can already predict the reaction I'll get for just daring to even mention something so unrealistic and outrageous.

Not outrageous. It's a personal decision you've made and I respect that fully.

I choose not to utilize that option, so my procedure to remove pregnancy as an option and condoms work well for me.

[optimus]

Condoms are for more than just preventing pregnancy. I'm surprised that in this day and age, full grown single men would promote not wearing condoms. Teenagers or guys in their early twenties? Irresponsibility is not surprising.

A better option is doing something that's 100% sure.... that's what I do, just abstain altogether. (until marriage) Although I can already predict the reaction I'll get for daring to even mention something so unrealistic and outrageous.

Question, don't you get horny?

[lily]

Question, don't you get horny?

What do you think? Let's just cut to the chase here, what's your point?

[Lulu]

I do not think a woman who's doing the responsible thing should be denied birth control. All these women are saying is the cost is outrageous when they pay cash. I've price checked and BC is $40-150/month and not every pill works for every woman. I continue to be surprised at the underlying sexism in this issue. As far as birth control, yeah I'll be in control of that. They are developing a male birth control pill and I just laugh. Men can't be expected to remember a birthday or anniversary, but you are going to give them the opportunity to screw something up every single day? No thanks. Personally, I'm not going to use condoms when I'm in a long term monogamous relationship... not gonna happen.

What is most offensive to me is that old fat white guys are deciding what a young woman's morality should be.

Because this is what the pig actually said...

"Can you imagine if you were her parents how proud...you would be?" he said. "Your daughter ... testifies she's having so much sex she can't afford her own birth control pills and she wants President Obama to provide them, or the Pope."

He continued:

"What does it say about the college co-ed Susan Fluke [sic] who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex -- what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex."

Limbaugh then said, "ok, so she's not a slut. She's round-heeled." "Round-heeled" is an old-fashioned term for promiscuity.

As far as sex before marriage, that is a personal decision and it's not up to the peanut gallery to decide what is best for a woman. For me personally, I need to know I'm sexually compatible with someone long before I'd consider marriage. Without the physical intimacy, I'd never get to that point where I'd marry him.

[optimus]

What do you think? Let's just cut to the chase here, what's your point?

I don't have a point really, I was just curious.

[Vader]

People have gotten so used to having their health care paid for by others, that they are piling every last possible thing onto the list of what must be paid for - including contraception, which is needed only in response to voluntary activites, like having premarital sex. They are even insisting that institutions with well-know, centuries-old prohibitions on such things, pay for it... as if they didn't know about the prohibitions when they applied to a private college run by those institutions.

Commentator Rush Limbaugh mentioned this on one of his shows, and people are screaming in outrage. But they aren't screaming at the girls , either for having so much sex or for insisting that Catholic schools violate their longstanding standards to pay for it anyway for them. They are screaming at Limbaugh for pointing all this out, and for (correctly) calling the girls "sluts".

The craziness goes on and on. How long will it be before students start demanding that a school training firefighters, stock and pay for extra-large fire extinguishers to make it easier to cope with the students' funloving habit of setting the dormitory curtains on fire several times a week?

---------------------------------------------

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/2...birth-control/

Georgetown co-ed: Please pay for us to have sex … We’re going broke buying birth control

by Tina Korbe
posted at 1:55 pm on February 28, 2012

At a hearing of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee yesterday, a single witness — Georgetown law student and “reproductive rights activist” Sandra Fluke — told sympathetic policy-makers that the administration’s so-called contraception mandate should stand … because her peers are going broke buying birth control.

“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown student insurance not covering contraception),” Fluke reported.

It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school, according to her calculations.

“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing.

Craig Bannister at CNSNews.com did the math — and discovered that these co-eds, assuming they’re using the cheapest possible contraception, must be having sex about three times a day every day to incur that kind of expense. What Fluke is arguing, then, is that her fellow law students have a right to consequence-free sex whenever, wherever. Why, exactly, especially if it costs other people something? When I can’t pay for something, I do without it. Fortunately, in the case of contraception, women can make lifestyle choices that render it unnecessary.

At one point, Fluke mentions a friend who felt “embarrassed and powerless” when she learned her insurance didn’t cover contraception. Can you imagine how proud and empowered that same friend would be if she learned she has the ability to resist her own sexual urges? We can only assume she doesn’t know that because Fluke and she both labor under the illusion that contraception is a medical necessity.

Some little part of Fluke must recognize that it’s not … because she sought to bolster her argument with an example of an illness in which contraception might be a medically necessary treatment. Another friend of hers, she said, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, for which contraception is a common treatment. Some insurance programs that don’t cover contraception normally would nevertheless cover it as a treatment for PCOS — but other insurance programs wouldn’t. Fluke makes it sound like contraception is the only treatment for PCOS. In fact, it isn’t — and contraception is prescribed as a treatment only when the woman also wants to contracept. Fluke says her friend is a lesbian — and so wouldn’t need contraception. Why didn’t she opt for any of the other treatments, then?

At the end of her testimony, Fluke spoke in strong language of her resentment of university administrators and others who suggest she should have chosen to attend a different university that would have offered student insurance that does cover contraception — even if that other university wasn’t quite as prestigious as Georgetown.

“We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health and we resent that, in the 21st Century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make that choice simply because we are women,” Fluke said.

Ms. Fluke, I resent that you think women are incapable of controlling themselves, of sacrificing temporary pleasure for the sake of long-term success. You make us sound like animals, slaves to our instincts and able to be used, but we’re better than that. We’re persons, equal to men in dignity and love.

Yet more republican assholes forcing thier beliefs on the populace. Typical republican bullshit. The University should be forced to write a letter of apology for their outright arrogance.

Republican swine.

[Vader]

So, what are you doing about it? Assuming you're as "mad" as you say.

This morning, radio commentator Rush Limbaugh said that out of sympathy for the financial straits these women are finding themselves in, he would volunteer to pay for as much aspirin as they wanted, for contraceptive purposes.

There, he's reaching out and offering help. And in the most practical, effective way possible. How about you?

He was being insulting and you're being an ass.

[jwreck]

The bottom line is if you want to have sex you should provide your own birth control and keep your hands out of other people's wallets to support your habit. Male or female.

[Sparkly Mary]

The bottom line is if you want to be obese you should pay for your own health care and keep your hands out of other people's wallets to pay for your poor weight management. Male or female.

It can work that way, too....

[hadit]

I guess. I just look at it as it's a mutual decision between the parties. Granted, I do have the utmost respect for men who put up with teases and accept that without question. It's becuase I don't understand the "cock tease" that leads me to think it's a mutual decision.

As a single female, even though I don't seek out partners, I still keep my own protection with me at all times. I don't want to have to decline simply due to the lack of a condom. Of course, I'm bold enough that I make it very clear that condoms aren't an option, and if that's not acceptable, then there's not going to be any action.

So in that instance, yes I do control the sex, but it's not out of a power play, but out of self-protection.

BTW, hadit, that's always been my philosopy. I take birth control and protection very seriously.
Now that I can't have more kids, it's the protection from disease and not birth control that is my motivation and I do keep my own stash. On that I agree with you, but I still don't think it's one gender's sole responsibility. Men can keep a stash, too.

You're a smart lady, and you are very right. Men should keep a stash, or get snipped like I did when I hit 40 and we didn't want any more kids.

I think our only real disagreement is over who should take responsibility to pay for contraception. I think these girls in this case should not be turning to the taxpayer for it.

[hadit]

I do not think a woman who's doing the responsible thing should be denied birth control. All these women are saying is the cost is outrageous when they pay cash. I've price checked and BC is $40-150/month and not every pill works for every woman. I continue to be surprised at the underlying sexism in this issue. As far as birth control, yeah I'll be in control of that. They are developing a male birth control pill and I just laugh. Men can't be expected to remember a birthday or anniversary, but you are going to give them the opportunity to screw something up every single day? No thanks. Personally, I'm not going to use condoms when I'm in a long term monogamous relationship... not gonna happen.

What is most offensive to me is that old fat white guys are deciding what a young woman's morality should be.

Because this is what the pig actually said...


As far as sex before marriage, that is a personal decision and it's not up to the peanut gallery to decide what is best for a woman. For me personally, I need to know I'm sexually compatible with someone long before I'd consider marriage. Without the physical intimacy, I'd never get to that point where I'd marry him.

The only disagreement I have is forcing the taxpayers to foot the bill.

[Sparkly Mary]

You're a smart lady, and you are very right. Men should keep a stash, or get snipped like I did when I hit 40 and we didn't want any more kids.

I think our only real disagreement is over who should take responsibility to pay for contraception. I think these girls in this case should not be turning to the taxpayer for it.

Then let's not look to the taxpayer to pay for type 2 diabetes caused by obesity. That's a lifestyle choice, too. Why should "my" premiums be used to cover medications caused by that lifestyle choice? I eat right and exercise. Why should I have to bear the cost of those who choose not to eat right and exercise and watch their weight?

[hadit]

Then let's not look to the taxpayer to pay for type 2 diabetes caused by obesity. That's a lifestyle choice, too. Why should "my" premiums be used to cover medications caused by that lifestyle choice? I eat right and exercise. Why should I have to bear the cost of those who choose not to eat right and exercise and watch their weight?

That's a legitimate question and goes right to the heart of the personal responsibility issue. Just how far does society have to go to subsidize less than smart behavior?

[Lulu]

You're a smart lady, and you are very right. Men should keep a stash, or get snipped like I did when I hit 40 and we didn't want any more kids.

Did you pay cash for the vasectomy? You get my point.

The only disagreement I have is forcing the taxpayers to foot the bill.

I agree. Most situations we are talking about though, the person is paying some kind of deductible. I don't know what colleges do now but I seem to remember being charged an amount each quarter to be covered by the university health plan. The women absolutely should pay a (reasonable) co-pay.

Now for example my BC is $20/month - the $5 first tier crap didn't work for me, I had major side effects. If my insurance or employer said "hey don't be a whore and stop having premarital sex because we won't pay for birth control" I would then pay $50 for my BC.

I'd love know if they pay for viagra.

[Lulu]

Well I asked a silly question. OF COURSE THEY DO.

The answer on Viagra coverage is usually yes, Catholic leaders say. And they argue that's neither hypocritical nor sexist.

Procreation is something the Catholic church encourages. And Viagra and other erectile dysfunction drugs can be of help.

Still, Richard Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops tells me that many Catholic-based health plans are now adding caveats that such drugs "should be prescribed for a medically identifiable problem to prevent wide abuse."

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012...-yes-to-viagra

[hadit]

Did you pay cash for the vasectomy? You get my point.

Of course not. I had insurance. If I didn't I probably wouldn't have had it done.

I agree. Most situations we are talking about though, the person is paying some kind of deductible. I don't know what colleges do now but I seem to remember being charged an amount each quarter to be covered by the university health plan. The women absolutely should pay a (reasonable) co-pay.

Now for example my BC is $20/month - the $5 first tier crap didn't work for me, I had major side effects. If my insurance or employer said "hey don't be a whore and stop having premarital sex because we won't pay for birth control" I would then pay $50 for my BC.

I'd love know if they pay for viagra.

If they do, they shouldn't be forced to.

[jwreck]

Then let's not look to the taxpayer to pay for type 2 diabetes caused by obesity. That's a lifestyle choice, too. Why should "my" premiums be used to cover medications caused by that lifestyle choice? I eat right and exercise. Why should I have to bear the cost of those who choose not to eat right and exercise and watch their weight?

Works for me.

[Sparkly Mary]

That's a legitimate question and goes right to the heart of the personal responsibility issue. Just how far does society have to go to subsidize less than smart behavior?

And who gets to choose? As it stands now, if a medical issue arises from obesity, or female problems that can be treated by BC, or heart disease from preventable causes are all covered under insurance, and they should be.
I pay premiums for my health coverage. Quite a nice sum in premiums.
As such, I don't want a "conscience clause" by my employer to all of a sudden decide that I can't get coverage for a condition caused by something "they" think I shouldn't be doing.
What if an employer decides that they don't want to cover pre-natal care for an unmarried woman?
Or heart disease caused by obesity?
Or treatement for liver problems caused by drinking, even if the employee no longer drinks?

The "conscience clause" is a bad idea.
If there is a medical problem that requires treatment, it should be covered under insurance.
(Boob jobs, botox and other elective cosmetic surgery is not a medical need, and I fully support having to pay out of pocket for that stuff)

Oh, and if this happens, and employers are allowed to opt out of covering things, then the final cost will get passed along to the taxpayers via ER treatment, and people relying on Medicaid to pay for what their insurance refuses to cover.