Sandra Fluke's DNC Speech Paints Stark Picture of Romney Presidency

[No Mo Obamas]

Ocean56 wrote:

<quoted text>
According to conservative male imbeciles -- Rush Limbaugh being a perfect example -- ANY woman who wants to avoid pregnancy and children is a "dyke" or a "feminazi."
That's why I don't take idiots like Rush seriously. Both marriage and motherhood are OPTIONS, not requirements, whether Rush and his misogynist followers like it or not.

I didn't hear Ms. Fluke yelling that men should be covered for birth control such as condoms or vasectomies. Does she only advocate for women? Gee, these radical Democrats look crazier every time they open their mouths and that includes those in the media.

Ms. Fluke should have been urging people to practice safe sex and to prevent unwanted pregnancies by using birth control...to be responsible.

[Ocean56]

Skuttlebutt wrote:

well you are wrong like most libterds

That's your OPINION, goofy. INTELLIGENT people know the difference between opinion and fact.

[Bitner]

hahahaha wrote:

<quoted text> You are so full of sht because this is all about the rights of a business to determine the coverages they want to provide. This discussion has nothing to do with forcing anyone to take contraception. Do you need reading remediation?
You are obviously not a doctor and most certainly not very well educated on the kinds of meds prescribed and how these medications are covered. My policy doesn't cover bc pills so if there was a medical necessity for them, it would be determined by the insurance company not the insurer. Honestly, people like you are really ignorant and gullible when the liberal media shoves their agenda up your azzes.

I disagree. The issue is about the fact that the gov't has every right to tell employers they cannot impose religion on their employees.

You are not a doctor, either. I am, however, in the medical field, am a woman, and know women who suffer from Menorrhagia. The best treatment is hormonal birth control. That is a fact.

[Bitner]

hahahaha wrote:

<quoted text> You miss the point. No business or organization should be forced to provide specific coverages or for that matter....any coverages at all! Georgetown should tell the pig faced Fluke they are no longer able to provide healthcare to professional students.

No, the point is that no employer has the right to impose their religious beliefs on their employees by way of their wage packet. Period.

[hahahaha]

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
I disagree. The issue is about the fact that the gov't has every right to tell employers they cannot impose religion on their employees.
You are not a doctor, either. I am, however, in the medical field, am a woman, and know women who suffer from Menorrhagia. The best treatment is hormonal birth control. That is a fact.

You're a fking idiot and this is not a case of an employer imposing it's religion, moron. You insult women with your ignorance because you have no clue about the treatments women undergo for this condition. You also don't have a clue how the insured are paid. Like most typical liberal morons, you follow the drumbeat from the msm and go along with whatever they say. America has been dumbed down. There is little hope for a future with idiots like you voting for socialized medicine.

[hahahaha]

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
No, the point is that no employer has the right to impose their religious beliefs on their employees by way of their wage packet. Period.

That's not the case at all. Businesses and organizations may choose whatever kind of benefit package they want. You're nothing more than an entitiled bich who expects a hand out and will use whatever excuse you can come up with to get one. Disgusting pos.

[Slew]

hahahaha wrote:

<quoted text> You're a fking idiot and this is not a case of an employer imposing it's religion, moron. You insult women with your ignorance because you have no clue about the treatments women undergo for this condition. You also don't have a clue how the insured are paid. Like most typical liberal morons, you follow the drumbeat from the msm and go along with whatever they say. America has been dumbed down. There is little hope for a future with idiots like you voting for socialized medicine.

Finish grade school, try again in 10 years....

[Morgana 9]

hahahaha wrote:

<quoted text> That's not the case at all. Businesses and organizations may choose whatever kind of benefit package they want. You're nothing more than an entitiled bich who expects a hand out and will use whatever excuse you can come up with to get one. Disgusting pos.

The real disgusting pos are the religious misogynist fanatics who will use any excuse they can to discriminate against women. To deny "women" a simple prescription coverage in a basic healthcare package based on their religion is absolutely imposing their religion on "women". The RCC is all about keeping women in "their" place as they disallow women in their governance. The only voice women have in the CC is NOT to go there, that gets their attention real quick, I am surprised that any women attend that archaic institution.

[serfs up]

Morgana 9 wrote:

<quoted text>
The real disgusting pos are the religious misogynist fanatics who will use any excuse they can to discriminate against women. To deny "women" a simple prescription coverage in a basic healthcare package based on their religion is absolutely imposing their religion on "women". The RCC is all about keeping women in "their" place as they disallow women in their governance. The only voice women have in the CC is NOT to go there, that gets their attention real quick, I am surprised that any women attend that archaic institution.

Morgana, when all the movement sstarted there were all these words about we just want our individual civil rights. Well that was achieved. But like any people who gets power, they become monsters not seeing what they do. You have done nothing for practically every person in this planet accept those you know. Now I am not the most religious person. But I do have a religious education. And it was done by hard working people. At an economical price compared to the insane public school system. A word of advice. Leave the religious institutions alone. You are interfering with them and what is left of religion in America. As the bad times continue and people are hurt and killed, you will see what you wrought. And at some point after all the suffering, your going to get your azz killed as people have enough. Most of the people who work for them are people of belief. if they do not like it, then they can leave. Leave the Church alone.

[Susanm]

Bitner wrote:

<quoted text>
That's right. However, employers ARE imposing religion on their employees, and that is unconstitutional.

No, they are making a choice as to what benefits they will offer, and they have every right to do that. The problem with many of you is that you demand that others respect your choices while at the same time you deny them theirs. Just because you have a right to something does not mean that you have the right to force me to provide it for you.

[Makes sense]

The contrast isn't so stark. Who says you can't have your cake and eat it too?

9/21/2012 1:00 AM PDT BY TMZ STAFF.


Mitt Romney's Son
Signed 'Abortion' Clause
In Surrogate Birth Contract


EXCLUSIVE

TMZ has learned Mitt Romney's son Tagg -- who had twins this year through a surrogate -- signed an agreement that gave the surrogate, as well as Tagg and his wife, the right to abort the fetuses in non-life threatening situations ... and Mitt Romney covered some of the expenses connected with the arrangement ... and it may boil down to an incredibly stupid mistake.

The twin boys -- David Mitt and William Ryder -- were born on May 4, 2012. We've learned Tagg and his wife Jen, along with the surrogate and her husband, signed a Gestational Carrier Agreement dated July 28, 2011. Paragraph 13 of the agreement reads as follows:

"If in the opinion of the treating physician or her independent obstetrician there is potential physical harm to the surrogate, the decision to abort or not abort is to be made by the surrogate."

Translation: Tagg and Jen gave the surrogate the right to abort the fetuses even if her life wasn't in danger. All the surrogate has to show is "potential physical harm," which could be something like preeclampsia -- a type of high blood pressure that could damage the mother's liver, kidney or brain, but is not necessarily life-threatening.

Paragraph 13 goes on:

"In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents' decision."

And there's another relevant provision in Paragraph 13:

"Any decision to abort because of potential harm to the child, or to reduce the number of fetuses, is to be made by the intended parents."

Translation: Tagg and his wife, Jen, had the right to abort the fetuses if they felt they would not be healthy.

Sources connected with Mitt Romney tell TMZ, Mitt was involved in the surrogate arrangement because he paid some of the expenses connected with the agreement. We do not know if Mitt Romney read the contract or knew the terms.

Mitt has said, "I'm in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest and the health and life of the mother." Otherwise, Romney is against abortion.

Now for the stupid mistake. We've learned Tagg chose the same surrogate in 2009, who gave birth to a boy. Attorney Bill Handel -- a nationally-known expert in surrogacy law who put the deal together between Tagg and the surrogate -- tells TMZ when the 2009 contract was drafted there was no Paragraph 13 providing for abortion because Tagg and his wife didn't want it.

Handel says in 2011, when the second contract was being drafted, everyone involved "just forgot" to remove Paragraph 13. Handel says, "No one noticed. What can I say?" .

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2012/09/20/mitt-romney-son...

[Morgana 9]

serfs up wrote:

<quoted text> Morgana, when all the movement sstarted there were all these words about we just want our individual civil rights. Well that was achieved. But like any people who gets power, they become monsters not seeing what they do. You have done nothing for practically every person in this planet accept those you know. Now I am not the most religious person. But I do have a religious education. And it was done by hard working people. At an economical price compared to the insane public school system. A word of advice. Leave the religious institutions alone. You are interfering with them and what is left of religion in America. As the bad times continue and people are hurt and killed, you will see what you wrought. And at some point after all the suffering, your going to get your azz killed as people have enough. Most of the people who work for them are people of belief. if they do not like it, then they can leave. Leave the Church alone.

Listen up you little pissant, I to have a religious education and I understand perfectly well the level of misogyny involved. I will leave them alone when they leave women alone. Got it?

Further in your over active imagination you believe you know something about me which you have been wrong on every count. Get help, you need it.

As far as your threat "And at some point after all the suffering, your going to get your azz killed as people have enough" do you actually think you are going to scare me into submission? You know where you can shove that.

The church does not rule this country nor will it be allowed to obtain that goal. Misogyny will not rule the day no matter no matter how twisted they become.

[Morgana 9]

T4YOU 2 wrote:

<quoted text> Give me a break . A 30 yr old woman who is still in Law school is a poor example for women everwhere. She is a shill for the Democrats and a failure as a human being . if she can't afford tne dollars for birth control, I am sure that planned parenthood will accomodate her.
Religion aside this is BS

Denial of prescription coverage aimed soley at women is discrimination. She has every right as a woman to bring that to attention. How exactly does that indicate failure?

You are right on one thing, male based religions are BS.

[Susanm]

Morgana 9 wrote:

<quoted text>
Denial of prescription coverage aimed soley at women is discrimination. She has every right as a woman to bring that to attention. How exactly does that indicate failure?
You are right on one thing, male based religions are BS.

If they ever develope birth control pills for men, then they have every right to not provide coverage for them. Of course condoms are birth control for men and I don't know of any insurance plans that cover them.

[Ocean56]

Morgana 9 wrote:

The real disgusting pos are the religious misogynist fanatics who will use any excuse they can to discriminate against women. To deny "women" a simple prescription coverage in a basic healthcare package based on their religion is absolutely imposing their religion on "women". The RCC is all about keeping women in "their" place as they disallow women in their governance. The only voice women have in the CC is NOT to go there, that gets their attention real quick, I am surprised that any women attend that archaic institution.

Agreed. Sadly, there are still a lot of misogynist imbeciles around who really hate the fact that women DO have rights, including reproductive ones. The Catholic Church IS practicing active discrimination, it just doesn't want it CALLED discrimination, especially not in public.

The fact that the CC still forbids women to use any form of RELIABLE birth control (NFP being the LEAST reliable, and isn't really birth control at all) tells me that it still considers women nothing more than baby producers. No thanks. I kicked that TOXIC religious institution to the curb 20+ years ago, and have had NO regrets whatsoever.

[Ocean56]

In his OUTSTANDING essay, "The Subjection of Women," John Stuart Mill said this:

"The general opinion of men is supposed to be, that the natural vocation of a woman is that of a wife and mother. I say, is supposed to be, because, judging from acts -- from the whole of the present condition of society -- one might infer that their opinion was the direct contrary. They might be supposed to think that the alleged natural vocation of women was of all things the most repugnant to their nature; insomuch that if they are free to do anything else -- if any other means of living, or occupation of their time and faculties, is open, which has any chance of appearing desirable to them -- there will not be enough of them who will be willing to accept the condition said to be natural to them. If this is the real opinion of men in general, it would be well that it should be spoken out. I should like to hear somebody openly enunciating the doctrine (it is already implied in much that is written on the subject)-- "It is necessary to society that women should marry and produce children. They will not do so unless compelled. Therefore it is necessary to compel them."

**********

I think Mill's assessment was 100% accurate. I think that the male policy and law makers of the 18th and 19th centuries DID believe that it was "necessary" (for THEM, of course) to compel women into being wives, mothers and NOTHING more. To that end, girls received far less education than boys did, and they couldn't attend college. Women were barred from almost all the trades and professions that would allow them to live as financially independent single women. The few occupations that women COULD enter paid far less to women than to men doing the same job. And of course, women weren't allowed to VOTE.

This is exactly the type of injustice and open discrimination against women that the 19th and 20th century feminists fought so hard to eliminate, and, no doubt, what many conservative right-wing guys would like to see women returned to. These guys can't get past the fact that both marriage and motherhood are now CHOICES, which women can REJECT if they don't want to be wives or mothers.

[Morgana 9]

Susanm wrote:

<quoted text>
If they ever develope birth control pills for men, then they have every right to not provide coverage for them. Of course condoms are birth control for men and I don't know of any insurance plans that cover them.

Excuse me for asking, but who provides a prescription for condoms?

Thank you for showing us your brightest bulb.

[serfs up]

Morgana 9 wrote:

<quoted text>
Listen up you little pissant, I to have a religious education and I understand perfectly well the level of misogyny involved. I will leave them alone when they leave women alone. Got it?
Further in your over active imagination you believe you know something about me which you have been wrong on every count. Get help, you need it.
As far as your threat "And at some point after all the suffering, your going to get your azz killed as people have enough" do you actually think you are going to scare me into submission? You know where you can shove that.
The church does not rule this country nor will it be allowed to obtain that goal. Misogyny will not rule the day no matter no matter how twisted they become.

If I need help it is because I was driven insane by man made laws that circumvent the nature of humans. Sixteen per cent of Americans are now having psychological issues to some degree to keep on the subject. Because of people like you, I will watch a terrorist walk by with a nuke and not say a word. Unless I get paid of course. And you know, I appreciate being an American. We are lucky compared to most of the world. That is what its all about now ain't it. And that is a reason why a state of tyranny not unlike the Soviet Union or NAZI Germany is blossoming.

[Ocean56]

serfs up wrote:

Morgana, when all the movement sstarted there were all these words about we just want our individual civil rights. Well that was achieved. But like any people who gets power, they become monsters not seeing what they do. You have done nothing for practically every person in this planet accept those you know. Now I am not the most religious person. But I do have a religious education. And it was done by hard working people. At an economical price compared to the insane public school system. A word of advice. Leave the religious institutions alone. You are interfering with them and what is left of religion in America. As the bad times continue and people are hurt and killed, you will see what you wrought. And at some point after all the suffering, your going to get your azz killed as people have enough. Most of the people who work for them are people of belief. if they do not like it, then they can leave. Leave the Church alone.

We can verbally criticize the Catholic Church or any OTHER church all we want, serfie, it's called FREEDOM OF SPEECH.

Don't like our criticizing the church? Tough. It isn't up to you to approve what views we can or cannot express here.

[gossamer]

Yes wrote:

<quoted text>
republicans hate women - especially those who speak up for themselves

Sarah Palin is not a Liberal.

It's hard for a liberal to have common sence.