252 replies to this topic

[AxlsMainMan]

Sounds like Foucault was on to something..

"But more important was the multiplication of discourses concerning sex in the field of exercise of power itself: an institutional incitement to speak about it, and to do so more and more; a determination on the part of the agencies of power to hear it spoken about, and to cause it to speak through explicit articulation and endlessly accumulated detail.

"Under the authority of a language that had been carefully expurgated so that it was no longer earned, sex was taken charge of, tracked down as it were, by a discourse that aimed to allow it no obscurity, no respite.

"Through the political economy of population there was formed a whole grid of observations regarding sex. There emerged the analysis of the modes of sexual conduct, their determinations and their effects, at the boundary line of the biological and the economic domains. There also appeared those systematic campaigns which, going beyond the traditional means--moral and religious exhortations, fiscal measures--tried to transform the sexual conduct of couples into a concerted economic and political behavior."

[PERM BANNED]

y

[Jill]

It's getting ridiculous now.

"If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator."

http://www.huffingto...kusaolp00000009

That is so utterly brilliant I can't gush enough.

That think that's a valid discussion that those on the left refuse to acknowledge. I enjoy sex as much as any man, but rabbit style behavior isn't conducive. We have higher thought and the ability to govern our actions. If you're in law school and you're sleeping around so much that the cost of birth control is prohibitively expensive to you, you have a serious problem. I don't believe in getting involved in people's sex lives. I don't want the government telling me or anyone else what they can and can't do in the bedroom. And most people, above all Democrats will say that same tune. But that same logic also demands that the government also not provide you certain items so you can practice your sex life. Like Rush said in the video, people demanding contraceptives paid for by the taxpayers are essentially being asked to be paid to have sex. That is ridiculous.

What Paul said at the AZ debates last week, I actually agreed with. At what point does promiscuity become immoral? And this isn't blame the woman type of thing. Men are just as culpable. Lots of sex with multiple partners leads to a higher risk of parenthood - single parenthood. And I know those of you on the left are loathe to acknowledge this truth, but single mothers are the most common denominator when it comes to poverty - which leads to violent crime, lower education and the perpetual state of remaining in the lower income bracket from generation to generation. That the majority of African-Americans are now raised in single parent homes accounts for the majority of the discrepancy from other races when it comes to disparity in pay and incarceration rate.

Like I said, I love getting laid. Nothing is as awesome as the first time you screw someone and you have that initial feeling of "victory" that you somehow won. But as responsible people, we owe it to ourselves and those who are ultimately going to be held financially accountable to do so in a safe and responsible manner. We aren't rabbits, so we shouldn't behave like rabbits. I don't want Santorum telling me who and when I can sleep with someone or what method of birthcontrol my partner and I can use. But I aslo don't believe it is on anyone else to provide me with the means to enable me to sleep around if I so choose.

There's a lot more to this issue (as its evolved) than is being discussed and a lot of people on the left want to frame it as a bunch of prudes from the victorian era telling women they can't use protection or should just stay a virgin until they're married. And that's not the case. What this has evolved into is a discussion about people behaving responsibly and thinking about the consequences of their actions. And in my opinion, when it comes to sex, the left has a horrible record in being honest about the issue and addressing the real world problems of irresponsible young people who forincate like rats and the eventual offspring they produce. Abortion is one answer to unwanted children. But so is being a responsible person and not acting on every inate urge you feel in your groin.

And this is so utterly stupid I don't even know where to begin. I guess at the beginning.

1. Unlike the cost of Limbaugh's viagara, the cost of insurance-covered birth control methods isn't even remotely tied to the frequency of the sex act. Some women using oral contraceptives are actually ... wait for it ... virgins! There are a multitude of forms of female birth control that need to be prescribed in this country, and not a single one requires larger quantities based on having more sex. You seriously need to educate yourself about the various forms of female contraception. Start here: http://www.womenshea...l-methods.cfm#b

2. The government isn't providing "certain items so [we] can practice our sex [lives]." The new health care reform law is requiring that all insurance policies, for which premiums are paid by the insured, include certain types of coverage for women's health care, including not charging them an additional out-of-pocket co-pay for their birth control. It's considered already paid for within their premium payment each month.

3. Rush Limbaugh is a fool idiot who spewed a bunch of crap nonsense that you would be wise to ignore in its entirety. Not a single analogy he drew had any factual basis, including the absurd contention that requiring insurance companies to cover the cost of birth control in the monthly premium PAID BY THE INSURED, is akin to making the government pay for you to have sex. That has to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard in my life.

4. Your entire 2nd and 3rd paragraphs are strawmen, but to address them, let me just say that what we on the left are fighting for are the very things that will reduce the incidence of the things you decry in the above. Use some logic, dude!

5. The notion that it is the left who "have a horrible record about the issue and addressing the real world problems of irresponsible young people who forincate like rats and the eventual offspring they produce," is so goddamn hilarious I can hardly see straight. The left are the only ones who have a record of honesty on that subject. It's the right who want to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that if you "teach children abstinence" that they'll just be good little do-bees and refrain from fucking. They will not. And worse yet, they will be so uninformed that they won't know the first thing about sexually transmitted diseases, which ones can be protected from with condom use and which ones can't, the actual efficacy of various methods of birth control and how to use them properly to prevent unwanted pregnancies. The right wants to deny our young people an opportunity to learn these things, holding the bizarre notion that teaching children about the risks of sexual behavior will somehow encourage them to have sex they otherwise wouldn't be having. It's absurd.

[Zimbochick]

I have a question for Flagg; Should these same insurance companies be forced to pay for the treatment of Sexually Transmitted Diseases? These are only acquired through sexual contact, and in this case the more sexual activity with different partners, the likelihood of transmission increases greatly?

[artcinco]

Is pregnancy a disease?


#iThing #word

[Zimbochick]

Is pregnancy a disease?

Are you insinuating birth control and the birth of a baby should not be covered by Health Insurance?

[Mr. Roboto]

Looks like Rushie apologized. Is this the first time he has ever done so?

[Mr. Roboto]

1. Unlike the cost of Limbaugh's viagara, the cost of insurance-covered birth control methods isn't even remotely tied to the frequency of the sex act.

I thought this was an extremely funny assertion by Limpbaugh. Apparently he is acutely unaware of how birth control works.

[Zimbochick]

Looks like Rushie apologized. Is this the first time he has ever done so?

Hmmm. he half-heartedly apologized for the initial statement. Pity he didn't apologize for the statements he made on the subsequent 2 days. How can disparaging remarks made on 3 consecutive days be classified as a slip?

A Statement from Rush

March 03, 2012

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit?In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

[wedjat]

I thought this was an extremely funny assertion by Limpbaugh. Apparently he is acutely unaware of how birth control works.

That's exactly what I said. And what do you want to bet everyone who listens to him thinks the same thing? Clueless.

[PERM BANNED]

y

[artcinco]

Are you insinuating birth control and the birth of a baby should not be covered by Health Insurance?

Depends on if the insurance company wants to offer that coverage or not. Or if purchaser of said coverage wants to have it or not.


#iThing #word

[artcinco]

As for Limbaugh, I heard some of his shows Thursday and Friday. I think he totally miscalculated and had bad stategery by using the terms he did in describing the grad student. Describing her the way he did was stupid and shifted the discussion away from what was occurring and made it about him.

My take on the matter is that she should consider another school or figure out a way to pay for her birth control since her school had a moral reservation against it and a first amendment right to not provide it.

The courts will sort it out. We will learn if the federal government can compell institutions to cover services they are opposed to and if the government can force insurance companies to absorb the cost.

Perhaps her male partner could pitch in and help pay for her birth control.


#iThing #word

[wedjat]

No way would I rely solely on condoms. Why? They break. Happened to me once & happened to my friend & she's got a baby to prove it now. Two forms is the way to go. If men had to worry about gettiing pregnant you can bet your ass they'd be rallying for birth control coverage. As it is, they don't. They only have to worry about std's if the condom breaks. As for pills, doctors highly recommend using a different form of birth control once you're over 30, especially if you're a smoker, due to increased health problems such as blood clots. So for most, depo is the next option. Expensive because not only do you have to pay for the office visit but also the shot. I was using that until our revised health insurance plan went into effect & now there's an increase. My co-worker just got her shot, saw her bill & realized it wasn't covered anymore. I believe the bill was about $200. She'll have to pay that again in 3 months. Now, does anyone have proof that viagara is indeed covered by most insurance companies? And also, why are people talking about that Fluke woman needing 3-5 condoms a day? I am watching her hearing on c-span right now & she never said that. Not a word. That's what i would call an outright lie.

[Jill]

Is pregnancy a disease?


#iThing #word

Pregnancy is a serious medical condition that carries a great number of risks. Women still die from childbirth, even in our advanced-medicine, first-world country. My cousin spent a week in a coma and suffers permanent disabilities from an Amniotic Fluid Embolism she suffered during delivery of her son, who died as a result of it.

This is a list of some of the serious potential side-effects of pregnancy:

High blood pressure
Hypothyroidism
Cholestasis of Pregnancy (a common liver disease that only happens in pregnancy)
Hyperemesis Gravidarum
Hysterectomy
Molar Pregnancy
Placenta Accreta
Toxoplasmosis
Listeria (pregnant women are 20 times more likely to become infected than non-pregnant healthy adults)
Pelvic floor disorder
HELLP Syndrome (Hemolysis (breakdown of red blood cells), Elevated liver enzymes, Low platelets counts (platelets help the blood clot))
Loss of dental and bone calcium
Hyperemesis gravidarum
Temporary and permanent injury to back
Dropped (prolapsed) uterus
Pre-eclampsia
Eclampsia (convulsions, coma during pregnancy or labor, high risk of death)
Gestational diabetes
Placenta previa
Anemia
Thrombocytopenic purpura
Embolism (blood clots - can lead to death - what put my cousin in a coma, caused life-long disabilities and killed her full-term baby)
Diastasis recti, also torn abdominal muscles
Mitral valve stenosis
Ectopic pregnancy (risk of death)
Broken bones (ribcage, "tail bone")
Hemorrhage
Severe post-partum depression and psychosis
Coronary and cardiovascular disease
Magnesium toxicity
Severe hypoxemia/acidosis
Increased intracranial pressure, brainstem infarction
Malignant Arrhythmia
Circulatory collapse
Placental abruption
Obstetric fistula
Miscarriage
Future infertility
Permanent disability
Heart attack
Stroke
Death

Why are you asking?

Looks like Rushie apologized. Is this the first time he has ever done so?

That was no apology.

First off, I'm not saying that insurance companies shouldn't pay for contraception or at least condone its use. My mother runs the pre-natal department for a large health insurance company that covers Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. I've seen all their statistics and guidance on this issue. Bottom line, assisting the subscriber with contraception is much cheaper than paying for all the exams and procedures leading up to, during and after the child is born. It's simple math. As I stated from post 1, I am for the use of birth control. I'm just not buying into the line of shit that 1.) this is an attac on women's rights 2.) This disucssion only affects women and 3.) Birth control is very expensive or a burden on your average user. There are multiple methods of birth control out there, ranging from the condom to the pill to vasectomies. I think some of the responsibility should fall on the person.

OMG dude, I can't even get through all your irrational blather.

I'm going to bottom-line this for you, k?

It costs exactly nothing - NOTHING - as in $0.00 - for insurance companies to provide full coverage without co-pay for contraception to women on their plans. Zero.

"Evidence from well-documented prior expansions of contraceptive coverage indicates that the cost to issuers of including coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods in insurance offered to an employed population is zero.

"In 1999, Congress required the health plans in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program to cover the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive methods. The FEHB program is the largest employer-sponsored health benefits program in the United States, and at the time, it covered approximately 9 million Federal Employees, retirees and their family members and included approximately 300 health plans. The premiums for 1999 had already been set when the legislation passed, so the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which administers the FEHB program, provided for a reconciliation process. However, there was no need to adjust premium levels because there was no cost increase as a result of providing coverage of contraceptive services."

Women in other countries have been able to buy their hormonal birth control over-the-counter for decades, at a teeny tiny fraction of what we're being ripped off for in the U.S. The identical birth control pills that I took in the U.S. that cost $30 a month, were $1 a month when I lived in Mexico. ONE DOLLAR compared to 30. And I didn't have to pay a doctor's office visit co-pay to get a prescription for them, either.

The pharmaceutical industry, and the politicians who are beholden to them to fill up their re-election coffers, are holding American women hostage to their profit margins, long, long after any cost associated with R&D has been covered by sales.

There. Is. No. Excuse.

Women in this country should be allowed to have full control over their own reproductive health. They should be able to walk into a drug store and pick up a pack of birth control pills for a modest price, exactly like men (and women, of course) can walk in and buy a condom. They've been on the market for decades and have been proven safe and effective. But our government won't allow us to strip them from being bundled with doctor visits and insurance premiums BECAUSE IT'S HUGE BUSINESS FOR THEM.

Stop justifying your inane blather with moralistic "sex and responsibility" crap. That isn't what this is even remotely about.


P.S. http://crooksandliar...-it-shouldnt-be If you're on Twitter or Facebook, please consider tweeing, sharing, and/or liking. Thanks.