A Conversation With Sandra Fluke
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-10-09/conversation-sandra-fluke
Last February, a House committee held a hearing on the new mandate that all insurance plans cover the cost of contraceptives. Republicans said the exemption for religious groups was too narrow and violated the First Amendment. Third-year law student Sandra Fluke was called by Democrats to testify at that hearing, but was turned away. Her testimony before a Democratic committee a week later was criticized by conservative talk-radio shows and thrust Fluke into the national spotlight. She went on to speak at the Democratic National Convention last month. A conversation with women's rights and social justice activist Sandra Fluke.
Guests
Sandra Fluke
women's rights and social justice advocate
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
This whole Sandra Fluke controversy was nothing more than a left wing sucker punch.
It was a media event created by Nancy Pelosi and other democrats. Staged to resemble an official hearing to create a problem where there was none, a political maneuver to push forward the bogus "war on woman" and to direct attention away from the Obama administrations attack on the Constitution's first amendment protection of religious freedom. Needless to say this cynical ploy worked at least for the time being and the democrats were once again successful through government mandates to steal our freedom.
Here's a good article on how Sandra Fluke entered the political debate, and why she was NOT allowed to testify before Congress.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/gop-dems-played-games-over-sandra-fluke/ar...
Be sure to ask Ms. Fluke about her desire to force health insurance companies to pay for sex change operations.
"In an academic article published last year, contraception advocate Sandra Fluke made the case that private health insurers should be required to pay for sex change operations."
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/05/in-2011-sandra-fluke-argued-for-sex-ch...
Sigh. The constant crude, bullying, defamatory comments by conservatives under their cloak of anonymity gets really tiresome at times. Especially attacking people they don't even know.
They think they have some moral high-ground over the rest of us, but their comments show that they have no morals at all.
Did it ever occur to you geniuses that attacking someone for exercising their first amendment rights undermines your argument about this being an issue of first amendment rights? Or is this just an excuse for you to violate OUR first amendment rights so you force your religeous views on us? And you wonder why we think you're idiots. Geeeez.......
@Arleen M:
Moral high-ground? Ms. Fluke chose to speak her mind from the bully pulpit of the national media, fronted by the democratic party. She is entitled to her opinion. I and the rest of America are entitled to ours. If, however, Ms. Fluke and those in her corner choose to push those same opinions in the face of Americans and then try to enact laws that force everyone, regardless of belief to act (and pay) just in accordance with those beliefs or opinions, then yes, you should expect everything else that comes with, and as a result of YOUR bullying actions. I ask where is your moral compass pointing? You can't have it both ways. If you are bold enough to express your opinion in front of the media and the nation, then don't expect everyone to agree with you, and don't feign offence and claim "moral high ground" when they don't agree with you.
Due to the holiday I scanned the site just to see what would be broadcast in the days ahead.........and, to my utter amazement, found HATERS lining up days ahead to hurl insults at someone they surely do not know personally or professionally.
Either Rush and Glen found some idle time....or the Kool-Aid they mixed up over the weekend had more arsenic in it than usual.
One point to note: having seen Ms. Fluke on C-Span, she never asked for "someone else" to pay for her health coverage......her point was to ensure access i.e. the ability to have coverage in her group insurance.
Also note: private insurers including self-funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceotions for specific groups and contracts; such carve outs provide discounts for particular coverage exceptions......and offer separate coverage at the discount rate for those who want additional or excepted coverage e.g. reproductive services.
Due to the holiday I scanned the site just to see what would be broadcast in the days ahead.........and, to my utter amazement, found HATERS lining up days ahead to hurl insults at someone they surely do not know personally or professionally.
Either Rush and Glen found some idle time....or the Kool-Aid they mixed up over the weekend had more arsenic in it than usual.
One point to note: having seen Ms. Fluke on C-Span, she never asked for "someone else" to pay for her health coverage......her point was to ensure access i.e. the ability to have coverage in her group insurance.
Also note: private insurers including self-funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceotions for specific groups and contracts; such carve outs provide discounts for particular coverage exceptions......and offer separate coverage at the discount rate for those who want additional or excepted coverage e.g. reproductive services.
Due to the holiday I scanned the site just to see what would be broadcast in the days ahead.........and, to my utter amazement, found HATERS lining up days ahead to hurl insults at someone they surely do not know personally or professionally.
Either Rush and Glen found some idle time....or the Kool-Aid they mixed up over the weekend had more arsenic in it than usual.
One point to note: having seen Ms. Fluke on C-Span, she never asked for "someone else" to pay for her health coverage......her point was to ensure access i.e. the ability to have coverage in her group insurance.
Also note: private insurers including self-funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceotions for specific groups and contracts; such carve outs provide discounts for particular coverage exceptions......and offer separate coverage at the discount rate for those who want additional or excepted coverage e.g. reproductive services.
Due to the holiday I scanned the site just to see what would be broadcast in the days ahead.........and, to my utter amazement, found HATERS lining up days ahead to hurl insults at someone they surely do not know personally or professionally.
Either Rush and Glen found some idle time....or the Kool-Aid they mixed up over the weekend had more arsenic in it than usual.
One point to note: having seen Ms. Fluke on C-Span, she never asked for "someone else" to pay for her health coverage......her point was to ensure access i.e. the ability to have coverage in her group insurance.
Also note: private insurers including self-funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceotions for specific groups and contracts; such carve outs provide discounts for particular coverage exceptions......and offer separate coverage at the discount rate for those who want additional or excepted coverage e.g. reproductive services.
Due to the holiday I scanned the site just to see what would be broadcast in the days ahead.........and, to my utter amazement, found HATERS lining up days ahead to hurl insults at someone they surely do not know personally or professionally.
Either Rush and Glen found some idle time....or the Kool-Aid they mixed up over the weekend had more arsenic in it than usual.
One point to note: having seen Ms. Fluke on C-Span, she never asked for "someone else" to pay for her health coverage......her point was to ensure access i.e. the ability to have coverage in her group insurance.
Also note: private insurers including self-funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceotions for specific groups and contracts; such carve outs provide discounts for particular coverage exceptions......and offer separate coverage at the discount rate for those who want additional or excepted coverage e.g. reproductive services.
Diane,
Please ask Ms. Fluke to comment on the following:
With the exception of rape, women have sex for one of two reasons; procreation or recreation. Procreation and/or recreation. That's it. Isn't it the case that Ms. Fluke would like to enjoy the latter, but have someone else pay for preventing the former?
@ HonestAbe: You are correct in stating "private insurers including self funded ones routinely create "carve outs" to make exceptions for specific groups and contracts". I have no problem with that... it allows average citizens a choice that they pay for individually, and not at the expense of the group or the nation... What is at issue here, however, is that this was an obvious attempt by a political party to escalate this issue from a private insurer or self funded insurer issue to the national healthcare stage, which is funded thru taxes. When you seek to elevate an issue, you sometimes get it, and then you have to be prepared for the onslaught of opinions that don't agree with you. My issue with Ms. Fluke is simple, she allowed herself to be used as a willing pawn in this instance. My much larger issue is with those of the political ilk who take advantage of people like her to further their agenda and then "feign" offence.
My original post does not contain ONE personal attack against Ms. Fluke.
Maybe some of us value the Constitution and the Bill of Rights more than the $10 a month cost for birth control pills. If the Catholic church does not offer as comprehensive health care coverage as students or staff like, QUIT or go to another school, subverting the Constitution is not an option, at least not without due process.
The Constitutional argument the left refuses to accept.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"
"Seeing that they were in an obvious losing battle, the Democrats paraded out a woman named Sandra Fluke who testified in a hearing on the subject of birth control. Sandra’s complaint was that because she attends Georgetown Law School (a Catholic-funded university) her birth control expenses are not covered in her health plan forcing her and her colleagues to pay $1,000 per year to cover their own birth control costs. What an outrage, right? The argument suddenly changed from a violation of the First Amendment to “women’s health” rights and access to birth control. I believe this was a diversion to get people away from the truth of the story and to give the illusion that Republicans want to take away birth control. But there are more than a few holes in the Democrats’ argument…"
Sandra Fluke chose to attend a Catholic law school. She could have gone to another school if she was so concerned about whether or not her insurance would cover her birth control expenses.
The Constitution, Separation of Church and State, and Birth Control?
http://rationalfaiths.com/the-constitution-separation-of-church-and-stat...
@Jim Gamble: The rights afforded by the 1st ammendment are pretty clear. This is about yet another effort to blur those rights. It's not about black and white it's about someone with a gray crayon wanting to color over what is already there in black and white. Ms. Fluke has the right to swing her fist as long as it does not come into contact with your (or my) nose...
My apologies for the repeated posts....identical. Some kind of internet "fluke".
Sorry for the pun......could not resist.
Climatewiz1,
I appreciate the honest and polite reply. That is the kind of discourse we all need.....even with differing opinions.
Regardless of party affiliation or religious background, the issue is one that could honestly be resolved in the free market. I hope (and pray) it is resolved amicably and for the benefit of all. It is a typical conundrum that sincere business persons handle routinely. There is no need to line up massive political forces on any "side".....make a business solution and implement it......it is a waste of emotion to do otherwise. Ms. Fluke's situation is important only to the extent that it allows a glitch to be tinkered with and fixed......then move on to real health care cost containment.
Reproductive services do save costs and lives......topics I am competent and experienced in via life, work, and family experiences.
Creativity is sorely lacking in politicians and punditry.
"In full indignation, Fluke said her critics were trying "to silence women's voices." She said this on ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and a number of other national media outlets."
"Democrats substituted Fluke in a last-minute witness-switch to testify about contraception"
"Despite her credentials as a heretofore unheard-of "birth control activist," the Oversight and Government Reform Committee declined to accept this 11th-hour witness on the grounds that Fluke did not have appropriate credentials for any congressional hearing, much less one on religious liberty."
"Nancy Pelosi used an even less appropriate committee to ensure that Fluke's "voice" would be heard -- the Democrats' Steering and Policy Committee, the normal function of which is to give House Democrats committee assignments."
I am a PRO LIFE Democrat who could never join with the NeoCon pro-lifers. The largest reason is their SEX POLICE STATE...... Who is allowed. When your allowed..... What position is legal or illegal. And whether or not human beings are allowed sex for pleasure,OR NOT. AND BIRTH CONTROL,OH PLEASE.
Clifford wrote:
"I am a PRO LIFE Democrat who could never join with the NeoCon pro-lifers. The largest reason is their SEX POLICE STATE...... Who is allowed. When your allowed..... What position is legal or illegal. And whether or not human beings are allowed sex for pleasure,OR NOT. AND BIRTH CONTROL,OH PLEASE."
A lot of vehement rhetoric, but not a lot of rational analysis. Sex Police State? I don't think so. People are allowed to have sex any time, (virtually) anywhere, as long as they are consenting, and, according to the law, adults. Morally, how do you ask someone else to pay for the consequences?
Honest?Abe wrote:"the issue is one that could honestly be resolved in the free market." "Ms. Fluke's situation is important only to the extent that it allows a glitch to be tinkered with and fixed......then move on to real health care cost containment. Reproductive services do save costs and lives......topics I am competent and experienced in via life, work, and family experiences."
The same guy who insisted Medicare trust funds don't exist and now ignores the Constitutional implications on the issue at hand is telling us he is competent and experienced on health care issues and this one in particular?
The same Guy who thought Obama was exercising "free market" principals when he bailed out GM is now telling us the issue can be "resolved in the free market"
You are a joke!.
How do you draw the line at what should be covered by health insurance?
Does health insurance pay for men's vasectomies? Viagra? Prostate cancer screenings? Well I don't have a prostate, so why should I have to pay for medical insurance that covers men's prostate problems? Take it all out of the coverage. Let men pay for that extra if they want it. How about things like obesity - should bariatric surgery be covered by those of us who aren't obese? How about smokers who get lung cancer - I never smoked, so why should my medical insurance cover their treatment? Colon cancer? Heart disease? Diabetes? Nobody forced people to eat all that red meat and sugary junk food. Did you fall and break a hip skiing? - Too bad, it's not my fault that you're a klutz. Pay the medical bill yourself.
My point is, that where does the lifestyle nitpicking stop? Contraception is a part of many womens healthcare, and good healthcare is a basic right in all modern industrialized nations. If men had to worry about getting pregnant, this wouldn't even be an issue.
The Sunday news from Switzerland (my country)...
Abortion rates have fallen drastically thanks to the wide availability of birth control...
As a matter of principle, I am "pro-life" and "pro-choice." Abortion is a horrendous moral dilemma for those who have to face "that choice." Christian faith would dictate compassion and understanding for those confronting this incredibly difficult situation... Abortion has to remain legal as a matter of public health policy and birth control must be made available to all...
I find it incomprehensible that a group of men (no women) are asked to testify about birth control in congress... What do they know? Nothing!
Whoever organized the hearing must have been incredibly obtuse!
Clifford wrote:
"I am a PRO LIFE Democrat who could never join with the NeoCon pro-lifers. The largest reason is their SEX POLICE STATE.."
-------------------------
Would that be the "Sex Police State" that is orchestrated by liberals? Have you ever looked at Occidental College (where President Obama was a student) rules for students regarding sex?
http://www.oxy.edu/student-handbook/general-college-policies/sexual-misc...
Phil A. Buster. The President attended a school is offensive?Your article said the students had a code of conduct,and rape is a no no. Why are offended? Is rape part of too much Big Government regulations?
Arleen M wrote: "How do you draw the line at what should be covered by health insurance?"
Forcing Catholic Universities to violate their first amendment rights to supply birth control and abortifacients is over the line. Birth control is widely available at little or no cost but that is not the issue. Government force is the issue, not the practicality or logic of health insurance supplied birth control. Why are so many of you incapable of grasping this obvious distinction?
@Arleen M: Ms. Fluke raised this question of a "PRIVATE" insurer. In her situation, when you sign up to pay for the policy, you pick and choose your coverage. If you don't like the coverage, the policy, the company or the institution that is offering it, you are free to go elswhere or purchase additional insurance that DOES cover what you want.
You may shout THIS IS UNFAIR TO WOMEN but the reality is, there is equal opportunity for perceived "unfairness" for men in this current situation. I hate to burst your bubble, but even with Obamacare this same selective treatment situation exists. The only difference is that the decision making will now be bogged down in government red tape and hindered by several more layers of "decision makers" much like the housing market is today. Tried getting a home loan lately? Apply that same process to critical health care decisions and good luck treating that hang nail... No single plan is going to suit everyone in every way... ever... We need to work TOGETHER to reach a reasonable, affordable solution. Thanks for your spirited comments!!!
Partisan Politics -
If a Catholic University (or any other private school) is receiving partial government funding, don't you think they they need to abide by federal laws? Georgetown University receives quite a lot of federal money:
In 2007, it received about $14.8 million in federal funds for research, with 64% from the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, the United States Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense.
In 2010, the school received $5.6 million from the Department of Education to fund fellowships in several international studies fields. Georgetown University Medical Center received an additional $118.4 million from these and other government sources.
Not to mention all the students who are receiving federal loans and grants to go there. If a private college wants the government to stay out of their business, then they need to stop taking federal money.
Miss Fluke was first attacked by school yard bully,Mr.Rush Limbaugh. Instead of Republican politicians protecting and standing behind the women of our nation,they choose the cowardly path.Today,they remind us of how tough they are or terror globally, but whimper at the feet of talk radio extremists at home.
Full Disclosure: I'm pro abortion, pro birth control, pro family planning, and anti overpopulation.
But no one (except myself) seems to admit that birth control pills are a recreational drug. They permit liberty, the pursuit of happiness and joy without fear of pregnancy,-- IMHO very worthy objectives particularly for young people who, at my age I envy.
But at even nine dollars a month (I checked at the local WalMart pharmacy) I object to be forced to pay for anyone's recreational drugs or for that matter, any form of birth control except that which helps the problem of overpopulation.
My insurance does not cover Viagra etc. And ED drugs are to treat a disease, not thwart a normal condition (pregnancy)
Clifford wrote:
"Phil A. Buster. The President attended a school is offensive?Your article said the students had a code of conduct,and rape is a no no. Why are offended? Is rape part of too much Big Government regulations?"
------------------------------
Your response seems to be redacted. Was your post the result of some NPR censorship?
Can you explain your first sentence? I mentioned President Obama went to Occidental to remove any doubt that this is a liberal institution.
Do you really believe that college students need a pamphlet to inform them that rape is a crime on campus just as it is off campus? Is there a pamphlet addressing murder as well?
The Occidental College pamphlet is about how the liberal "Sex Police," as you call them, require both parties to have a notarized and dully authorized document proclaiming their intent to engage in carnal knowledge before they have carnal knowledge. This is Bill Clinton's 1984 nightmare come true.
I'm not a legal scholar, but doesn't the Bill of Rights apply to citizens of the United States and not to inanimate, lifeless entities? If they (churches, universities, hospitals) do have speech and religious rights, do those rights trump the rights of citizens (or employees)? It seems it's the members of these institutions that have the rights and no one is taking away any rights from the members of these institutions to practice or speak as they please.
pee pee tic:
is it your contention that the "left wing" does not have first amendment rights, and is therefore "stealing our freedom" by expressing their opinions?
And you wonder why we think you're idiots.....geez