Rush Limbaugh hits out at suggestion that university should cover birth control in health insurance

Mar 1, 2012 Full story: Daily Mail 28

He's a bullish conservative radio host known for making outrageous outbursts, but even by his standards this was a little over-the-top. Rush Limbaugh, 61, called a student at a Catholic university a 'slut' for saying religious institutions should cover birth control in health insurance.

Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Texas Annie

Arlington, TX

#22 Mar 5, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Really! What disease does contraceptives cure?
Maybe in your world with the fistula tramps, disease would be the first thing on her mind. But birth control pills treat many female conditions. Furthermore, they are over six times as effective as condoms.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#23 Mar 5, 2012
Texas Annie wrote:
<quoted text>
Maybe in your world with the fistula tramps, disease would be the first thing on her mind. But birth control pills treat many female conditions. Furthermore, they are over six times as effective as condoms.
That's all true. The point is, why should others pay for them through higher insurance costs. Some of them cause medical problems for some women that creates the need for follow ups to insure they're not causing harm.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#24 Mar 5, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
That's all true. The point is, why should others pay for them through higher insurance costs. Some of them cause medical problems for some women that creates the need for follow ups to insure they're not causing harm.
They dont! The fact is that GT pays the same for the policy if it covers contraception or not!

Also, Teh insurance companies WANT to pay for contraception.....its far cheaper than a pregnancy and a baby!

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#25 Mar 5, 2012
If insurance Provides her with birth control for sex any time she wants. They should cover ED drugs for men anytime they need it. The pills are about $10 each so the bill could be $3650.00 a year does she want to pay for that?

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#26 Mar 5, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>They dont! The fact is that GT pays the same for the policy if it covers contraception or not!
Also, Teh insurance companies WANT to pay for contraception.....its far cheaper than a pregnancy and a baby!
Well, that's fine, FFS. I like the choice. If insurance want it, good for them. Some don't. Some religions don't want to pay for it. I am more about a federal mandates than anything. There are other mandates beside that one. It eliminates the ability to tailor plans to specific needs. To me, it's not the contraception issue, it's the federal intrusion.

Since: Aug 10

Buffalo, NY

#27 Mar 5, 2012
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, that's fine, FFS. I like the choice. If insurance want it, good for them. Some don't. Some religions don't want to pay for it. I am more about a federal mandates than anything. There are other mandates beside that one. It eliminates the ability to tailor plans to specific needs. To me, it's not the contraception issue, it's the federal intrusion.
We just see it from opposite ends. I dont see it as government intrusion. To me its a catholic university restricting this owman's right to healthcare. THeir ability to talor a plan still exists, they just cant tailor it to restrict FDA approved perscription drugs. That is already court decided LAW. The law already states that GT could be exempt if they have a 100% catholic student body, but they dont, the chose diversity! An employer or school being able to deny healthcare based on THEIR religion is complete garbage. relgions do NOT have the right to write of change existing law! I would hate to find out that my employer were a scientologist and doesnt believe in medicine at all. Its a protection of rights issue. Any catholic who doesnt want contraception will simply not CHOOSE (another word for freedom) to use it!

Again, Georgetown pays the same rate with or without contraception, so the "paying for it" is a moot point!

This whole flap is nothing more than uneducated people spewing stupid hatred because one dimwit on the radio told them to. If you actually read flukes testimony, it never mentions sex, just health issues!

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

#28 Mar 5, 2012
The Government should stay out of our lives.

Since: Jan 11

Mount Holly, NJ

#29 Mar 5, 2012
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>We just see it from opposite ends. I dont see it as government intrusion. To me its a catholic university restricting this owman's right to healthcare. THeir ability to talor a plan still exists, they just cant tailor it to restrict FDA approved perscription drugs. That is already court decided LAW. The law already states that GT could be exempt if they have a 100% catholic student body, but they dont, the chose diversity! An employer or school being able to deny healthcare based on THEIR religion is complete garbage. relgions do NOT have the right to write of change existing law! I would hate to find out that my employer were a scientologist and doesnt believe in medicine at all. Its a protection of rights issue. Any catholic who doesnt want contraception will simply not CHOOSE (another word for freedom) to use it!
Again, Georgetown pays the same rate with or without contraception, so the "paying for it" is a moot point!
This whole flap is nothing more than uneducated people spewing stupid hatred because one dimwit on the radio told them to. If you actually read flukes testimony, it never mentions sex, just health issues!
Well, a lot of Catholics do choose to use them. The issue is the constitutionality of a government forcing a church run organization to purchase insurance that covers contraceptives against their beliefs. You're right, if all of the employees were Catholic, it wouldn't be an issue. A simple exemption would suffice. A simple solution could be for the insurance company to offer a rider to the policy to the employees who want them. The extra amount to the premium wouldn't amount to much from the employee's contribution.

I really don't care about the church. They have been in bed with the government since their support of the New Deal and it came full circle to bite them in the rear. Maybe they will learn to "render onto Caesar which is his" and run charitable organizations without government money. It's only a possible erosion of constitutional rights for me.

Actually, I really don't have a problem with Fluke. She has done some good work for women in the area of domestic violence. And, I'll stand by her right to say what she believes. Another constitutional right.:-)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Georgetown University Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ian Tuttle: Diagnosing Conservatism as a Mental... Nov 25 Giuliani the Frau... 1
Investigative journalist Jose Antonio Vargas to... Nov '14 STOMP AN ILLEGAL ... 1
Obama: Global Warming Threatens 'Hopes and Drea... Nov '14 Earthling-1 4
The Islamic State gets the political treatment ... Oct '14 WasteWater 12
Susan Rice goes to China in bid to salvage rela... Sep '14 RayHCpp 1
Conflicts Engulf Christians in Mideast Aug '14 jinxi 1
Sex education should start sooner, study finds Aug '14 bugsy goldstein 4
More from around the web