FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: Smurfette Principle on February 16, 2012, 06:43:44 pm
-
So let's say you're a representative and you're the committee chairman for a Congressional hearing on requiring women's health and contraception to be covered by insurance companies.
Do you:
a) call a panel of advocates for women's health to serve as witnesses
b) have actual women explain why they would need contraceptive coverage
c) have an all-male panel question an all-male witness pool about women's health and contraception.
I'll give you three chances to guess what Darrell Issa did, and the first two don't count. (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/16/426850/democratic-women-boycott-issas-contraception-hearing-for-preventing-women-from-testifying/)
Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) had asked Issa to include a female witness at the hearing, but the Chairman refused, arguing that “As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”
And so Cummings, along with the Democratic women on the panel, took their request to the hearing room, demanding that Issa consider the testimony of a female college student. But the California congressman insisted that the hearing should focus on the rules’ alleged infringement on “religious liberty,” not contraception coverage, and denied the request. Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) walked out of the hearing in protest of his decision, citing frustration over the fact that the first panel of witnesses consisted only of male religious leaders against the rule. Holmes Norton said she will not return, calling Issa’s chairmanship an “autocratic regime.”
-
Misogynistic pricks. Incidentally, I believe Jon Stewart mocked the shit out of that one the other night.
-
Stay classy, Republicans. You refuse do shit about jobs, so instead we get you sticking your noses up every woman vagina.
-
Look on the bright side. If they decide that women's contraceptives should be covered, that proves that even men think so and they should. Like most normal humans.
If not, we know why.
-
Anyone hear about how Bayer was used as a contraceptive?
-
Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) had asked Issa to include a female witness at the hearing, but the Chairman refused, arguing that “As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”
Because the “freedom of religion an conscience” in this case has absolutely no effect on other people’s reproductive rights, right?
-
Ah, I love the smell of disingenuity in the evening.
“As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”
Because heaven forbid an issue have multiple facets, and therefore relates to several different sets rights and freedoms. Yes, religion and conscience are two of the issues being addressed here, but it's ludicrous to suggest that a topic which is integral to women's rights somehow magically doesn't relate to god damn women's rights.
-
Anyone hear about how Bayer was used as a contraceptive?
...wait. How does that work?
Ironbite-that...doesn't make sense.
-
Anyone hear about how Bayer was used as a contraceptive?
...wait. How does that work?
Ironbite-that...doesn't make sense.
Because it's bs, the guy said women used to put them between their knees. The only way Bayer could work is if you ODed on the stuff. There were condom use and other contraceptive use, like a diapharm,and a lot of that was obtained illegally.
-
Anyone hear about how Bayer was used as a contraceptive?
...wait. How does that work?
Ironbite-that...doesn't make sense.
"They put it between their knees" is the punchline.
Though that's disingenuous for multiple reasons, one of which is that you can still have sex with your legs closed (http://www.sexinfo101.com/launchpad.shtml) (NSFW).
-
Anyone hear about how Bayer was used as a contraceptive?
...wait. How does that work?
Ironbite-that...doesn't make sense.
You tell me (http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/02/foster-friess-in-my-day-gals-put-aspirin-between-their-114730.html)
-
HE DIDN'T EXPLAIN ANYTHING! HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK!?
Ironbite-my poor abused brain.
-
"Paging George Takei, repeat, paging Mr. Sulu!" Because Issa and his ilk ARE douchebags. And unless that one idiot meant injecting the aspirin behind the knee, I don't know how that would work.
-
I love his belittling of the concerns.
-
HE DIDN'T EXPLAIN ANYTHING! HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY WORK!?
Ironbite-my poor abused brain.
If you're holding Aspirin between your knees, your legs are shut.
-
You can still have sex with your legs closed.
Ironbite-hell, according to one link someone posted, it's more enjoyable for the woman.
-
What makes this more disgusting is the minority of commenters who agree with him, saying that they shouldn't have to pay for others' contraception, that women need to not have sex, and that contraception is not a matter of health care. Fuck. You. Guys. I'm getting sick of this stigma that female contraception is only used for sex, when it's not. There are health reasons that female contraception, specifically the pill, is used. My 13 year old sister may have to use the pill soon, due to an unhealthily long and heavy period that brings her blood-iron down to dangerously low levels. She's had to have liquid iron directly infused into her blood through a drip. I don't know if my mom's insurance covers it, considering she works at Catholic hospital. If this isn't corrected, whether by the stopping itself or stopping through the pill, then the only other option is to have her constantly injected and supplemented with iron. But I guess constant iron injections are better than the more obvious solution of controlling her period, especially since the solution could, horror of horrors, allow her to have sex freely when she's older! *screams in terror* If that did happen, then the pill working as a contraceptive would actually be a side effect of the pill, not the intent, since her taking it is for health reasons, not recreational reasons.
I think this goes back to a common pro-life argument: rape, incest, and health cases can't be considered because they're such a small percent of abortion, and most are done for convenience. They'd probably use the same argument here: more women use the pill to have sex than due to health issues, so those cases shouldn't be a serious consideration. Basically, they'd rather people who actually need it suffer, just so they can feel good about themselves for not having indirectly helped somebody else have sex outside of marriage or not for the purpose of procreation. It's funny how they whine about "socialists" and "libs" having entitlement issues, when a lot of their arguments sound like "Mine, mine, mine, ME, ME, ME! I don't want to!"
(And before anyone asks, no, doctors haven't figured out what's causing these long periods yet)
-
"Religious freedom" in this instance means institutions can force their beliefs on employees. If Catholic institutions can block birth control coverage, does that mean Jehovah's Witnesses can block blood transfusions, or that christian scientists can avoid having to provide any health coverage at all?
-
You can still have sex with your legs closed.
You know that. I know that. But I don’t think Issa knows that.
Ironbite-hell, according to one link someone posted, it's more enjoyable for the woman.
I don’t believe that the types of folks that go on about “keeping your knees shut” are too concerned over whether women are enjoying their sex.
What makes this more disgusting is the minority of commenters who agree with him, saying that they shouldn't have to pay for others' contraception, that women need to not have sex, and that contraception is not a matter of health care. Fuck. You. Guys. I'm getting sick of this stigma that female contraception is only used for sex, when it's not. There are health reasons that female contraception, specifically the pill, is used. My 13 year old sister may have to use the pill soon, due to an unhealthily long and heavy period that brings her blood-iron down to dangerously low levels. She's had to have liquid iron directly infused into her blood through a drip. I don't know if my mom's insurance covers it, considering she works at Catholic hospital. If this isn't corrected, whether by the stopping itself or stopping through the pill, then the only other option is to have her constantly injected and supplemented with iron. But I guess constant iron injections are better than the more obvious solution of controlling her period, especially since the solution could, horror of horrors, allow her to have sex freely when she's older! *screams in terror* If that did happen, then the pill working as a contraceptive would actually be a side effect of the pill, not the intent, since her taking it is for health reasons, not recreational reasons.
Well obviously, the morally correct choice is to use the iron drip. ::)
-
I'm still trying to figure out how they think this is an attack on religion? Who's religious rights are being violated? If anything, peoples' religious rights have been violated for awhile by these institutions. Institutions don't have religious freedom; individuals do. They think it's an attack on their religion when they're not allowed to force their narrow interpretation not only on their own followers (Catholics, for example) but also other Christians, and non-Christians alike.
And the fact they have an all male member of this panel speaks volumes. Between Sanitarium's comments about the military and comments about rape being a gift from god, the Fox News rape-apologist, and the recent attempts of GOP lawmakers to redefine rape paired with all of this birth control nonsense really shows how they feel about women...and they'll pay for it in November.
-
I'm still trying to figure out how they think this is an attack on religion? Who's religious rights are being violated?
I think they are somehow under the impression that requiring their health plan to cover contraception and abortion will force them to actually use contraception and get abortions, thereby violating their religious beliefs.
-
And the fact they have an all male member of this panel speaks volumes. Between Sanitarium's comments about the military and comments about rape being a gift from god, the Fox News rape-apologist, and the recent attempts of GOP lawmakers to redefine rape paired with all of this birth control nonsense really shows how they feel about women...and they'll pay for it in November.
Sadly... no they won't. If they were going to pay for it in November, they'd already have been paying for it for years. The kind of people who are actually brain-addled enough to vote Republican in the first place just don't care about issues like this.
-
Basically, they'd rather people who actually need it suffer, just so they can feel good about themselves for not having indirectly helped somebody else have sex outside of marriage or not for the purpose of procreation.
Married women use birth control. (I know you know that. Only pointing out the obvious.) Sometimes, married women use birth control for the same reason as your sister. It cracks me up when people assume the only women using birth control are unmarried women who want to sleep around.
-
I'm still trying to figure out how they think this is an attack on religion? Who's religious rights are being violated?
I think they are somehow under the impression that requiring their health plan to cover contraception and abortion will force them to actually use contraception and get abortions, thereby violating their religious beliefs.
No, they're under the impression that they'll be forced to pay out-of-pocket for other people's abortions. That is how fundies think that employer insurance works.
-
I'm still trying to figure out how they think this is an attack on religion? Who's religious rights are being violated?
I think they are somehow under the impression that requiring their health plan to cover contraception and abortion will force them to actually use contraception and get abortions, thereby violating their religious beliefs.
No, they're under the impression that they'll be forced to pay out-of-pocket for other people's abortions. That is how fundies think that employer insurance works.
Oh, yeah. That’s how they view taxes, as well. Shoulda realized that.
-
I'm still trying to figure out how they think this is an attack on religion? Who's religious rights are being violated?
I think they are somehow under the impression that requiring their health plan to cover contraception and abortion will force them to actually use contraception and get abortions, thereby violating their religious beliefs.
No, they're under the impression that they'll be forced to pay out-of-pocket for other people's abortions. That is how fundies think that employer insurance works.
Oh, yeah. That’s how they view taxes, as well. Shoulda realized that.
They seem to be anathema to paying for other people's anything. That's how civilization works really, and there's no opt out.
-
I figure once these institutions take a cent of State and/or Federal money, they don't get to force their religion on their employees.
Also, I find it ironic if these insurance plans already cover viagra.
I'm sorry but I don't think the Pope (the one who ultimately has say over the Catholic's BC issue) gets the freedom to force his viewpoint on anyone -hell he's not even an American.
But to these conservative knuckle-draggers, you are violating their religious freedom if you don't allow them to force their bullshit on others.
-
What makes this more disgusting is the minority of commenters who agree with him, saying that they shouldn't have to pay for others' contraception, that women need to not have sex, and that contraception is not a matter of health care. Fuck. You. Guys. I'm getting sick of this stigma that female contraception is only used for sex, when it's not. There are health reasons that female contraception, specifically the pill, is used. My 13 year old sister may have to use the pill soon, due to an unhealthily long and heavy period that brings her blood-iron down to dangerously low levels. She's had to have liquid iron directly infused into her blood through a drip. I don't know if my mom's insurance covers it, considering she works at Catholic hospital. If this isn't corrected, whether by the stopping itself or stopping through the pill, then the only other option is to have her constantly injected and supplemented with iron. But I guess constant iron injections are better than the more obvious solution of controlling her period, especially since the solution could, horror of horrors, allow her to have sex freely when she's older! *screams in terror* If that did happen, then the pill working as a contraceptive would actually be a side effect of the pill, not the intent, since her taking it is for health reasons, not recreational reasons.
I think this goes back to a common pro-life argument: rape, incest, and health cases can't be considered because they're such a small percent of abortion, and most are done for convenience. They'd probably use the same argument here: more women use the pill to have sex than due to health issues, so those cases shouldn't be a serious consideration. Basically, they'd rather people who actually need it suffer, just so they can feel good about themselves for not having indirectly helped somebody else have sex outside of marriage or not for the purpose of procreation. It's funny how they whine about "socialists" and "libs" having entitlement issues, when a lot of their arguments sound like "Mine, mine, mine, ME, ME, ME! I don't want to!"
(And before anyone asks, no, doctors haven't figured out what's causing these long periods yet)
This is the reason I did a major face palm the other day when some Libertarian tool on FB, kept on saying the answer to the whole birth control issue was for people to go out a buy a pack of condoms. As someone who was almost put on the pill for my period, and know serveral others that have messed up issues with their periods and are on the pill because of it, it annoys me to get lengths when people ignore this.
-
You can still have sex with your legs closed.
Ironbite-hell, according to one link someone posted, it's more enjoyable for the woman.
This is true (on both points, although the second has numerous "ifs" attached to it), but you and I both know he's referencing the old "Keep your legs shut!" bit used against women who have an active sex life.
-
What makes this more disgusting is the minority of commenters who agree with him, saying that they shouldn't have to pay for others' contraception, that women need to not have sex, and that contraception is not a matter of health care. ...
I had a friend use that those exact same reasons and he works in the health insurance industry.
Oy vay.
-
"Religious freedom" in this instance means institutions can force their beliefs on employees. If Catholic institutions can block birth control coverage, does that mean Jehovah's Witnesses can block blood transfusions, or that christian scientists can avoid having to provide any health coverage at all?
Interestingly this was covered in the SCOTUS when an amish employer didn't want to do Social Security with holdings for his employees.
The SCOTUS put the kibosh on that, including SCALIA no less.
“We have never held that an individual’s religious beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the State is free to regulate. On the contrary, the record of more than a century of our free exercise jurisprudence contradicts that proposition."
Employers can't use their religion to deny coverage for their employees. That would be an imposition of religion. Religious conviction only covers the person holding it.
Not to mention that 27 states already have similar laws and have survived challenges just fine.
-
This entire debacle is just ridiculous. If women didn't already have a reason to not vote for the GOP, this just further cements those reasons.
These people HAVE to know that what they are doing alienates the majority of the voters. When you appeal only to the rabid, self righteous religious crowd, all the moderates and swing voters will flee to the other side to prevent lunacy from gaining access to the White House.
Take John McCain for example. Prior to him selecting his VP, I was really considering voting for him. However, when he introduced an idiotic Rapturite as a VP I couldn't risk voting for him in the event he died and that crazy bitch was in charge of our nuclear ordinance. Never trust anyone who believes the end of the world is coming in their lifetime with the ability to launch our nukes or send our armies places.
-
The whole damned thing made me so mad when I first heard about it that my beard instantly grew two inches!
-
BEHOLD! I give you the nation's foremost experts on women's issues!
(http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Google-ChromeScreenSnapz387.png)
Notice something odd (http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/how-the-gop-went-back-to-the-1950s-in-just-one-day.php?ref=fpa) about the panel above?
Here's a hint: Sandra Fluke, (http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5705/) a Georgetown student who has a friend who lost an ovary because her Catholic university doesn't cover birth control, was asked by the Democrats to speak. She was refused access, because she wasn't "appropriate or qualified" to be there.
Difficulty: one of the old, old men on this panel has apparently vowed never to have sex, ever.
We're living in some interesting times. Not long ago--at all--anyone who suggested, seriously, that we needed to start discussing women's unfettered access to contraception in this country would have been laughed off the stage. And yet, we're actually having this conversation. And it wasn't that long ago that anyone who seriously suggested that we needed to restrict the vote to property owners, or that there was a good side to slavery and we needed to carefully consider it, or that we needed to discuss the very concept of civil rights, period, would have been treated like the dunces they are. They'd have become global laughingstocks, like David Duke or Pat Buchanan, like your Dittohead uncle who can't get through even one Thanksgiving dinner without breaking into a snarling, hate-filled rant about the uppity nBONG in the White House, or the nasty feminazis like your aunt, who left him for someone who wasn't a mouthbreathing troglodyte.
And yet, here we are. It's fucking hysterical, I tell you.
-
They seem to be anathema to paying for other people's anything. That's how civilization works really, and there's no opt out.
And yet, they expect everyone else to pay for their crap.
Never trust anyone who believes the end of the world is coming in their lifetime with the ability to launch our nukes or send our armies places.
Indeed!