GOP Presidential Debate

[okarol]

Yes, true, many of the owners/moderators on IHD are personally offended by the nature of many of the anti-Christian comments as they have told me in person by PM on more than one occasion. Yet they tolerate your right to your own opinions according to the first amendment. Imagine that.

Hemodoc: This is a perfect example of directing a personal attack toward me and our team. I have never told you such a thing, as you well know.
You can argue all you want but don't drag others into it to prove your point.
Watch it.
Jeeez I hate this section of IHD. I wish you all would go somewhere else.

okarol/admin

[amanda100wilson]

Yes,the uterus song is offensive too.

[Hemodoc]

Yes, true, many of the owners/moderators on IHD are personally offended by the nature of many of the anti-Christian comments as they have told me in person by PM on more than one occasion. Yet they tolerate your right to your own opinions according to the first amendment. Imagine that.

Hemodoc: This is a perfect example of directing a personal attack toward me and our team. I have never told you such a thing, as you well know.
You can argue all you want but don't drag others into it to prove your point.
Watch it.
Jeeez I hate this section of IHD. I wish you all would go somewhere else.

okarol/admin

Fair enough Karol, that wasn't my impression by our prior PM's as well as those of other moderators and admin, but out of respect for you and IHD, I will never participate on any political threads ever again. Let them blast away at all of the Christians as much as they wish, I won't defend that position ever again on IHD. I apologize for my mistaken impression of your prior PMs.

God bless,

Peter

[MooseMom]

Oh dear...the uterus vote.  Am I a terrible person for thinking that is kinda funny?  Worse still, I do not have one anymore.  Does my vote still count?  Lol

Ah shucks, you have lost your vote Moosemom. Better go dig it up again to fit in. LOL.

That damned thing nearly killed me, so I had to get rid of it.  But I DO have an official voters registration card, so that will just have to do.

[MooseMom]

I do not want to blast away at anyone.  I don,t even want to argue.  I have certain views, but I am certainly no expert in any field, and I like hearing from people who may know more thsn me.  Where can i go on ihd to have an interesting chat and an exchange of ideas?  I Want to talk with ihders who hold opinions different from my own!

None of the current GOP nominees seem to be particularly beloved, so if you had had your druthers, who would you have liked to see run, and why?  For Dems, who do you see as the party,s rising star i 2016? 

Any thoughts re VP?

[Gerald Lively]

To the owners, moderators and others, I confess that I incited HemoDoc.  I did it because he is easy, he is radically right-wing, and I lived politics as a City Manager.  I still love the game.

However, this election (2012) is more important than any game.  The extremism we see today comes from an ideology that is clearly anti-intellectual.  It is all too easy to substitute ideology for thinking, and there is little doubt that the electorate has become apathetic.  By raising these issues, others can see how the political positions shape up.  For that reason I have challenged HemoDoc.  I am not sorry in the least.

Back in the old days, I was a speaker on Women’s rights.  As a nation, we have forgotten that the Constitution was written for everyone.  I recall regretting seeing the 1960’s movement split into a less potent multi-issue theme, and I went with women’s rights.  I wanted it all.  But history takes unanticipated twists and turns, and now we have a Santorum, Gingrich, Perry, Palin and Romney pretending to be great thinkers of our time.

We cannot afford to ignore the issues of the day.  We cannot support extremism unless the logic is there for all too see, and the answer is not to take away the rights of citizens.  We have the shame of the Patriot Act, an electorate with 40% who believes the President is a Muslim, not that it matters.  On another forum I am arguing with strident “birthers”, hot-headed war hawks who want to go to war in Syria and Iran, and those who believe men can decide the rights of women without asking.

The shame is in us because we have not worked hard enough to save this Republic, this democratic experiment.  Hitch up your suspenders and get to work.

Gerald Lively
Old-Time Moderate.

[cariad]

Well, I guess you better get busy blasting away at all of the liberal bloggers using these terms. Once again, I didn't come up with the term, nor did I hear it from the GOP. Shucks, I didn't realize how offended you would be with liberal bloggers only a few of whom I quoted.  Are you going to tell me you are offended by the Uterus Song as well, or since they are blasting the GOP it might be OK.  Good grief, getting in trouble for using the liberal terms blasting away on the internet. I guess you will likewise get mad at all of those folks stating the so called albeit fake "war on the uterus" as well?

Most of the examples given were not using the word 'uterus' as a stand-in for women. That is what is offensive. Remarkable that anyone could misunderstand that, but then, this is what I mean by needing to live something before you can claim to be some sort of expert. I have been on the ugly end of sexism and I will continue to call it out when I see it. The uterus song was about using the word uterus - who cares. Wholly different from what I was talking about. We have people on here, I am one of them, who say they do not want to be treated like just a kidney, well I do not wish to be referred to as a uterus. That is despicably sexist.

I don't waste my time trying to police the Internet. There is such a thing as the spirit behind the statement. If two black people want to jokingly refer to themselves using racial epithets, I certainly don't delude myself into thinking that this means it's all the same if I were to call them those words. This is why I said in Gerald's discussion that I don't think sexism is viewed as anywhere near as serious as racism. Women like me who have seen Republicans casually declare that I should be stripped of my body autonomy, I should have to submit to institutionalized rape if I want a perfectly legal abortion in Virginia, I should be denied insurance coverage of drugs that "only" prevent pregnancy (which is not even true) and on and on and on - we know how deadly serious sexism really is. You are free to follow your religion, and I am free to follow no religion and receive medical care based on science not theology. When you are female in America, this is very, very personal, so I find it bizarre that you think we're following Alinsky's "rules' written 40 years ago. The GOP candidates have said that the government should be allowed to take control of my body. This is as personal as it gets. It is absolutely a sexist attack on freedom.

[Hemodoc]

Well, I guess you better get busy blasting away at all of the liberal bloggers using these terms. Once again, I didn't come up with the term, nor did I hear it from the GOP. Shucks, I didn't realize how offended you would be with liberal bloggers only a few of whom I quoted.  Are you going to tell me you are offended by the Uterus Song as well, or since they are blasting the GOP it might be OK.  Good grief, getting in trouble for using the liberal terms blasting away on the internet. I guess you will likewise get mad at all of those folks stating the so called albeit fake "war on the uterus" as well?

Most of the examples given were not using the word 'uterus' as a stand-in for women. That is what is offensive. Remarkable that anyone could misunderstand that, but then, this is what I mean by needing to live something before you can claim to be some sort of expert. I have been on the ugly end of sexism and I will continue to call it out when I see it. The uterus song was about using the word uterus - who cares. Wholly different from what I was talking about. We have people on here, I am one of them, who say they do not want to be treated like just a kidney, well I do not wish to be referred to as a uterus. That is despicably sexist.

I don't waste my time trying to police the Internet. There is such a thing as the spirit behind the statement. If two black people want to jokingly refer to themselves using racial epithets, I certainly don't delude myself into thinking that this means it's all the same if I were to call them those words. This is why I said in Gerald's discussion that I don't think sexism is viewed as anywhere near as serious as racism. Women like me who have seen Republicans casually declare that I should be stripped of my body autonomy, I should have to submit to institutionalized rape if I want a perfectly legal abortion in Virginia, I should be denied insurance coverage of drugs that "only" prevent pregnancy (which is not even true) and on and on and on - we know how deadly serious sexism really is. You are free to follow your religion, and I am free to follow no religion and receive medical care based on science not theology. When you are female in America, this is very, very personal, so I find it bizarre that you think we're following Alinsky's "rules' written 40 years ago. The GOP candidates have said that the government should be allowed to take control of my body. This is as personal as it gets. It is absolutely a sexist attack on freedom.

Dear Cariad, since you are addressing me directly, I will answer you directly. You seem taken aback by use of a liberal blogger term and say you take personal umbrage that I would refer to women in such a manner using an anatomical term to represent women. I find that quite colorful especially since you seem to relish using anatomical terms for GOP conservative candidates, or perhaps you have forgotten your own venture into that realm. Perhaps I should remind you once again what you said a few days ago:

cariad
Premium Member
Elite Member
   
Re: Is This "Hate Women Week"? Not in my home!
« Reply #12 on: March 07, 2012, 09:09:43 PM »

Hate Women Week? No. Try century. At least.

I was defining 'misogynist' to my boys just last night. It seems a word that they would need to use sooner than later. It does not carry anywhere near the weight as 'racist' does in my opinion, and I was telling them that sexism is every bit as horrible and destructive as any other bigotry.

I could not tell them what Rush Limbaugh said because they would want me to define the words and it would just be too messy. 

Quote from: billybags on March 07, 2012, 10:02:07 AM
Is it the one with the most money that wins, or the one who gives out daft statements?

It would seem so.... However, I say keep talking, gentlemen (term used loosely). Barack Obama must wake up laughing.
Quote from: billybags on March 07, 2012, 10:02:07 AM
They seem to want you to follow their rules. No sex before marriage, no abortions, your  Santorum sounds a right ahole.

A-hole is being demure. You have googled 'Santorum' right? If that does not work, try 'Santorum definition'. (Make sure you are not eating.)


So while you prance about with your false sense of modesty because I only echoed the terms used by liberal bloggers and media, you thought it was demure to call Rick Santorum an A-Hole as you put it.  Yes, yes, yes, you do indeed know how to flag the false sense of propriety don't you Cariad. Maybe applying your own sense of outrage to your own comments with anatomical references to Santorum as an A-Hole, which was too reserved for your tastes and you instead recommend a vile and disgusting reference on the internet instead:

santorum (san-TOR-um) n.
   1. The frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter
      that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex.

http://spreadingsantorum.com/

Yes, yes, yes, the outrage Cariad of using liberal media terms. Ohhhhh, Hurumphhhhh, OOhhhh, Ahhhhhh, what outrage.  Yes, Yes, Cariad, you truly are an arbiter of moral turpitudes alright. Yes, yes, the outrage.

[amanda100wilson]

Well, I didn't and I am offended too as I have already stated.

[Hemodoc]

Well, I didn't and I am offended too as I have already stated.

Dear Amanda, the political threads are often ones that go bump in the night and not easy to engage in. Sorry, but I am only echoing what is become a campaign slogan for the left. Take a look:

http://www.zazzle.com/no_uterus_no_vote_sticker-217560625362150658

If you are offended, you will need to voice your concern to those on the left in the media since you will likely hear this all the rest of this year until the election. Sorry, not my term, but it is in the political discourse of the media this year. Yes, I don't use that term in my own life, but this is a political thread after all looking at current political trends and this is indeed where it is at today in many news outlets daily. All you have to do is Google the term and the war on the uterus to see that displayed. If you don't like the terms used, which frankly I don't blame you, please take it up with those on the left that are using these terms.

[Hemodoc]

derf Toon- Republican War against the Uterus

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101617896

[YLGuy]

Well, I didn't and I am offended too as I have already stated.

Dear Amanda, the political threads are often ones that go bump in the night and not easy to engage in. Sorry, but I am only echoing what is become a campaign slogan for the left. Take a look:

http://www.zazzle.com/no_uterus_no_vote_sticker-217560625362150658

If you are offended, you will need to voice your concern to those on the left in the media since you will likely hear this all the rest of this year until the election. Sorry, not my term, but it is in the political discourse of the media this year. Yes, I don't use that term in my own life, but this is a political thread after all looking at current political trends and this is indeed where it is at today in many news outlets daily. All you have to do is Google the term and the war on the uterus to see that displayed. If you don't like the terms used, which frankly I don't blame you, please take it up with those on the left that are using these terms.

This is childish. Take responsibility for your actions. YOU said it on this forum.

[cariad]

Fair enough Karol, that wasn't my impression by our prior PM's as well as those of other moderators and admin, but out of respect for you and IHD, I will never participate on any political threads ever again. Let them blast away at all of the Christians as much as they wish, I won't defend that position ever again on IHD. I apologize for my mistaken impression of your prior PMs.

Well, since you have literally stated that you would leave a thread dozens of times, I knew full well you could be counted upon to break your word yet again. Funny, you didn't mention that your respect for IHD ends if someone returns to express their views? You were being insulting and I wasn't going to let it stand.

Since when is a-hole a 'liberal' term? Santorum is most definitely an a-hole, Billy was right. That is not replacing a body part for the word 'men'. It is saying that that particular person is an outright ghastly specimen. Dan Savage's definition is beyond gross. Again, he is insulting one person for doing what Santorum does - tries to strip away everyone's freedoms but his own. As much as I find Savage's definition nauseating, when he's right, he's right.

You whine across no less than three threads that any comment about birthers or tea partiers or republicans is a direct attack on you, then you say that liberals are trying to personalize something? The hypocrisy is simply staggering. You say dildos are a perversion after DD implies that she has one (or more) and then you claim that that is not calling her a pervert.

I don't need to personalize a direct attack on my freedoms. It could not be more personal no matter what I say or do.

Yes, yes, yes, the outrage Cariad of using liberal media terms. Ohhhhh, Hurumphhhhh, OOhhhh, Ahhhhhh, what outrage.  Yes, Yes, Cariad, you truly are an arbiter of moral turpitudes alright. Yes, yes, the outrage.

What on earth....? Is that meant to be some sort of grunting or something? Try to pull yourself together. I have seen many temper tantrums in my life, though none from anyone over the age of 5.... till now.

derf Toon- Republican War against the Uterus

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101617896

Ah, just one more, eh? Until the next one, no doubt. And the next. And the next....

YLGuy is right. Your speech reflects upon you and you alone. It is your responsibility entirely, yet you are pitifully trying to justify your actions by saying that someone who may or may not identify as liberal does this, so it's OK. Many horrifying people identify as conservative. I would never use their rhetoric. But then, I am not a mindless follower of any one else.

Why don't you go out and police the internet yourself if it bothers you so much? Don't try to tell me what to do with my time.

[MooseMom]

I'm sure everyone here realizes that this discussion has become a microcosm of what we're complaining about in the first place, that important issues are being ignored while we blather on about whether "uterus" is a bad word in such and such a context.

I used to hope that the GOP nomination process should go on and on because of its entertainment value, but now I am wishing for it all to stop and for the nominee to be quickly determined.  These nomination processes seem to be geared to the base of whichever party is looking for their nominee, so it makes me wonder if the discussions/debates become skewed either far left or far right.  I don't think the vast majority of people are quite so politically minded, and they will not become actively engaged until around Labor Day.  Then, the two contenders will have to be much more forthcoming with their plans for our country's future.  And the world may be a very different place by then.  Maybe Greece will have defaulted, Syria will have ceased to exist as we know it, Israel will have attacked Iran and Iran will have responded by closing the Straits of Hormuz.  I hope if that's the case, we won't be arguing about whether or not Rush Limbaugh should be booted off the radio airwaves.

Since this is supposed to be a democracy, we get the government we deserve.  If we can't sort through the divisive rhetoric and pay attention to what's important, who knows what kind of government we're going to get?  Are we becoming ungovernable?  You'd think so, listening to the media.  And this will be the first general election since Citizen's United.  What do you all think will be the outcome?  No matter who wins, will you wonder if the election has been bought, and if so, what do you think has been actually purchased?

The economy, the EU and whether or not it will become a two-tiered organization (and how will that affect the US), the Arab Spring, the environment, the weaning off of fossil fuels, a crumbling infrastructure, the funding of education, immigration, possible war with Iran, relations with Israel, fair trade with China, bringing American wealth and business back into America, healthcare...these are the days that test our resolve. 

[cariad]

Well, MM, much as I take your point, I consider the attempts to strip away women's reproductive freedom to be deadly serious. I also have been trying to make a point that I think others are making for me: sexism is considered a silly joke compared to some of the other bigotry in the world. We all have our issues, and this is one that is of particular importance to me. Probably not difficult to guess why!

[MooseMom]

Well, MM, much as I take your point, I consider the attempts to strip away women's reproductive freedom to be deadly serious. I also have been trying to make a point that I think others are making for me: sexism is considered a silly joke compared to some of the other bigotry in the world. We all have our issues, and this is one that is of particular importance to me. Probably not difficult to guess why!

And I absolutely take YOUR point.  I'm still trying to figure out why contraception has suddenly become a big issue!  I thought we had had this one worked out.  LOL!  I guess not!

I am not sure that the debate has been clearly defined, though.  One person's fight for reproductive freedom may be another's fight against what they see to be immoral sexual behaviour.  Frankly, that's what I think this is REALLY about...it's about sex.  And anything that is about sex seems to be exclusively about women.  "Immorality" or promiscuity seem to be accusations thrown exclusively into the faces of women.  Men are entirely left out of the equation.  I don't understand why more men aren't fighting to keep their right to limit the size of their families.

We have a schizophrenic attitude about sex in this society.  It's fine to be entertained by boobies and other bits if they are on TV or on a video game.  Using sex to sell products is a time worn tactic, and no one blinks an eye.  But when it comes to sex between a real man and a real woman, then there are suddenly all sorts of rules, mostly aimed toward keeping wimmin in check. 

What I find to be most galling is the rate of sexual assault against women in our military.  I find it to be beyond appalling that ANY soldier would EVER harm another soldier, another man or woman who was serving our country and risking sacrificing their life.  If a man in the military cannot have respect for a fellow female soldier, then all is lost.  I'm enraged that our military, which is supposed to be comprised of our best people, is tainted by this and has done little to redress the situation.  If our soldiers do not know how to look after each other, then how can we trust them to look after us.

Violence against women is a horrible problem throughout the world, and I am not sure why that is so.  It has always been that way.

I can't help but feel that this current debate on contraception is just one more manifestation of our society's lack of respect and value for women.  I suspect that most women at one time or another have felt devalued simply because of their gender.  Maybe, cariad, you should start a new thread in which each of us could post our own "You're just a woman" story.  I know I have one.  Actually, I have two, one from here in the US and one from the UK, so I can prove that this dismissive attitude is international!!  LOL!  Go ahead...start the thread, and I'll happily post my stories!

[Gerald Lively]

Okay, listen up!   I am all in favor of women being on top. 

[Hemodoc]

Well, MM, much as I take your point, I consider the attempts to strip away women's reproductive freedom to be deadly serious. I also have been trying to make a point that I think others are making for me: sexism is considered a silly joke compared to some of the other bigotry in the world. We all have our issues, and this is one that is of particular importance to me. Probably not difficult to guess why!

Dear Cariad, no one is stripping away women's rights at all. This entire Obama created chaotic discourse is a fraud right from the start. Title 10 covers contraceptives for all that ask with preference to those of low income. Fluke should have advised her friend to seek Title 10 coverage. What kind of a law student is Fluke who states she is a woman's rights advocate that is so desperately ignorant of the laws of the land that cover contraceptives for all that ask since 1970. If her friend was too poor for contraceptives, then she would have been eligible for this program. I have listed the link several times, but you still overlook that issue, which doesn't surprise me really. I don't believe you folks are interested in discussing the issues, only denigrating the GOP.

So, go tell all of your lady friends with a uterus to seek title 10 coverage if they can't afford 9 dollars a month to pay for it themselves.

If you wish to discuss the contraceptive issue from a GOP perspective, this is about moral objections to contraceptives mainly by the Catholics who don't wish to pay for that coverage as a result of their long standing religious objection to contraceptives. Moral conscience is a recognized right based on the first amendment that has been honored in this country for 400 years going back to our colonial days. That is the issue since we have universal access to contraceptives in this nation already.

So, if you want your access to contraceptives and you can't afford 9 dollars a month, go to the Title 10 folks and they will provide it or go to one of the many family planning charities that will also do the same. You are completely wrong that this is a woman's reproductive issue, it is a first amendment religious issue to preserve the right to adhere to the teachings of your own religion. Obama will drop this in the face of the many legal suits against this policy and then claim victory as an advocate of woman's rights. Complete scam that the country is falling for.

[Hemodoc]

Fair enough Karol, that wasn't my impression by our prior PM's as well as those of other moderators and admin, but out of respect for you and IHD, I will never participate on any political threads ever again. Let them blast away at all of the Christians as much as they wish, I won't defend that position ever again on IHD. I apologize for my mistaken impression of your prior PMs.

Well, since you have literally stated that you would leave a thread dozens of times, I knew full well you could be counted upon to break your word yet again. Funny, you didn't mention that your respect for IHD ends if someone returns to express their views? You were being insulting and I wasn't going to let it stand.

Since when is a-hole a 'liberal' term? Santorum is most definitely an a-hole, Billy was right. That is not replacing a body part for the word 'men'. It is saying that that particular person is an outright ghastly specimen. Dan Savage's definition is beyond gross. Again, he is insulting one person for doing what Santorum does - tries to strip away everyone's freedoms but his own. As much as I find Savage's definition nauseating, when he's right, he's right.

You whine across no less than three threads that any comment about birthers or tea partiers or republicans is a direct attack on you, then you say that liberals are trying to personalize something? The hypocrisy is simply staggering. You say dildos are a perversion after DD implies that she has one (or more) and then you claim that that is not calling her a pervert.

I don't need to personalize a direct attack on my freedoms. It could not be more personal no matter what I say or do.

Yes, yes, yes, the outrage Cariad of using liberal media terms. Ohhhhh, Hurumphhhhh, OOhhhh, Ahhhhhh, what outrage.  Yes, Yes, Cariad, you truly are an arbiter of moral turpitudes alright. Yes, yes, the outrage.

What on earth....? Is that meant to be some sort of grunting or something? Try to pull yourself together. I have seen many temper tantrums in my life, though none from anyone over the age of 5.... till now.

derf Toon- Republican War against the Uterus

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101617896

Ah, just one more, eh? Until the next one, no doubt. And the next. And the next....

YLGuy is right. Your speech reflects upon you and you alone. It is your responsibility entirely, yet you are pitifully trying to justify your actions by saying that someone who may or may not identify as liberal does this, so it's OK. Many horrifying people identify as conservative. I would never use their rhetoric. But then, I am not a mindless follower of any one else.

Why don't you go out and police the internet yourself if it bothers you so much? Don't try to tell me what to do with my time.

Yes, yes, the outrage about echoing liberal media terms. Yes, yes. But you will call whoever you want much worse and stand up proudly to defend your "right" to do so. Give me a break. That is called hypocrisy Cariad.  Thank you for defending your prior comments and relishing in the foul language attacks on GOP by Bill Maher and other late night comedians. Yes, yes, the outrage.

[MooseMom]

If you wish to discuss the contraceptive issue from a GOP perspective, this is about moral objections to contraceptives mainly by the Catholics who don't wish to pay for that coverage as a result of their long standing religious objection to contraceptives. Moral conscience is a recognized right based on the first amendment that has been honored in this country for 400 years going back to our colonial days. That is the issue since we have universal access to contraceptives in this nation already.

Wait a minute...I though Gov Romney enacted a mandate requiring that ALL employers in Massachusettes offer free contraception coverage, and he's a Republican.  So, I don't think this is really a "GOP" position unless you define that as being necessarily an "anti-Obama" position. 

As for people getting contraception via Planned Parenthood, I'm afraid that organization may not be around for much longer as there is a GOP push to completely defund it.  So, the slack will have to be picked up by other entities since defunding Planned Parenthood may result in less than universal access.  If the Catholic Church really does not want to be forced to provide contraception coverage (and they are NOT being forced to do so even now), then it would be in their interest to make sure PP remains viable.

This has nothing to do with freedom of religion, sadly, but has everything to do with one more time disagreeing with anything that our President is trying to do.  He could issue a statement that the sky is blue, and a GOPer somewhere will argue that no, Mr. Obama is trampling over our freedom to believe that the sky is really red.

If you want to believe that President Obama created this chaos, feel free, but like I've said to you before, it has been GOPers Blunt, Issa and now Boehner who have allowed this chaos to be perpetuated.  How could they be so incredibly stupid?  I don't see Mr Obama talking about anything but jobs, manufacturing and jobs.

[KarenInWA]

So, go tell all of your lady friends with a uterus to seek title 10 coverage if they can't afford 9 dollars a month to pay for it themselves.

If you wish to discuss the contraceptive issue from a GOP perspective, this is about moral objections to contraceptives mainly by the Catholics who don't wish to pay for that coverage as a result of their long standing religious objection to contraceptives. Moral conscience is a recognized right based on the first amendment that has been honored in this country for 400 years going back to our colonial days. That is the issue since we have universal access to contraceptives in this nation already.

So, if you want your access to contraceptives and you can't afford 9 dollars a month, go to the Title 10 folks and they will provide it or go to one of the many family planning charities that will also do the same. You are completely wrong that this is a woman's reproductive issue, it is a first amendment religious issue to preserve the right to adhere to the teachings of your own religion. Obama will drop this in the face of the many legal suits against this policy and then claim victory as an advocate of woman's rights. Complete scam that the country is falling for.

Not all birth control pills are $9 a month!!! Just because one pill may be that low (and do we know if that is a co-pay amount, or the actual amount? I have never seen that be investigated) does not mean that it is the pill that will work for any particular woman in her particular situation.  If a pill that will fix a female-only medical problem is $100 a month, and that is what her dr is prescribing based on the patients particular condition, other conditions, etc, then that is the pill that she will need. This is why BC pills are Rx and not OTC. Like with anything, taking BC pills does have some risk, and it is up to the dr and the patient to determine which pill has the least risks/most benefits for the patient and her situation.  It is not that easy!!!! I would think, HemoDoc, that as a doctor, you of all people would understand this.  I don't get why you're using uneducated rhetoric that you can find on any political message board or article comment these days.  Frankly, with your competent intelligence in all things ESRD, I expect more of you.

Whenever I've been on the pill, I paid a small co-pay for it, just like any other drug I have been prescribed. If it were fully covered by my insurance, sure, I'd like that! Who wouldn't? But, I have no problem paying a co-pay for it, either. What I do have a problem with is my insurance company not covering it at all because of a religious belief I do not subscribe to, *especially* when it is for a valid medical reason!!!! Until these Catholic bishops spend any time with uncontrollable bleeding from their crotches, what they have to say about the issue means absolutely nothing to me.

In regards to Title X, that will remain a viable option for people as long as there is funding for it. If the GOP wins this election season, then we can all kiss that funding bye bye and say hello to women with horrible periods and other female problems, along with a lot of unplanned pregnancies, which will lead to a bigger need for services, more kids in schools that the GOP doesn't want to fund, and the list goes on and on and on....

Do you really want to live in *that* country???

KarenInWA

[MooseMom]

I have a great deal of respect for people who love their faith and are true to it.  And I am extremely disappointed when I say that the Catholic Church as a man-made institution has been so abysmally inadequate in certain areas that I have little respect for its view on anything.  I believe that there is a profound difference between "the Catholic Church" and "Christianity", and the former does not always successfully represent the latter.

The Catholic Church has always been a misogynist institution that has historically been corrupt and probably still is.  I know a fair number of Catholics who believe the same way and were/are still horrified by the child sex abuse cases that have become so numerous that the Church is fodder for late-night talk show hosts.  I am innately suspicious of men in costumes.

I extend my apologies to anyone who finds offense in my comments.  Again, I am respectful of the Catholic faith but not necessarily in the institution.  I give little credence to any of their arguments.  I believe in God but I do not believe in bishops.

If they want to believe that this is about religious freedom, to them, perhaps maybe it is, but that doesn't mean that that is how the debate is defined for the rest of us. 

Why aren't the Catholic bishops complaining about how the wages they pay to their employees could conceivably (haha...pun alert!) be used to buy birth control?  Catholic employers are forced to pay wages, and if they are used to pay for pills, well, why isn't THAT a problem?  How far is this religious freedom supposed to go?

[Hemodoc]

So, go tell all of your lady friends with a uterus to seek title 10 coverage if they can't afford 9 dollars a month to pay for it themselves.

If you wish to discuss the contraceptive issue from a GOP perspective, this is about moral objections to contraceptives mainly by the Catholics who don't wish to pay for that coverage as a result of their long standing religious objection to contraceptives. Moral conscience is a recognized right based on the first amendment that has been honored in this country for 400 years going back to our colonial days. That is the issue since we have universal access to contraceptives in this nation already.

So, if you want your access to contraceptives and you can't afford 9 dollars a month, go to the Title 10 folks and they will provide it or go to one of the many family planning charities that will also do the same. You are completely wrong that this is a woman's reproductive issue, it is a first amendment religious issue to preserve the right to adhere to the teachings of your own religion. Obama will drop this in the face of the many legal suits against this policy and then claim victory as an advocate of woman's rights. Complete scam that the country is falling for.

Not all birth control pills are $9 a month!!! Just because one pill may be that low (and do we know if that is a co-pay amount, or the actual amount? I have never seen that be investigated) does not mean that it is the pill that will work for any particular woman in her particular situation.  If a pill that will fix a female-only medical problem is $100 a month, and that is what her dr is prescribing based on the patients particular condition, other conditions, etc, then that is the pill that she will need. This is why BC pills are Rx and not OTC. Like with anything, taking BC pills does have some risk, and it is up to the dr and the patient to determine which pill has the least risks/most benefits for the patient and her situation.  It is not that easy!!!! I would think, HemoDoc, that as a doctor, you of all people would understand this.  I don't get why you're using uneducated rhetoric that you can find on any political message board or article comment these days.  Frankly, with your competent intelligence in all things ESRD, I expect more of you.

Whenever I've been on the pill, I paid a small co-pay for it, just like any other drug I have been prescribed. If it were fully covered by my insurance, sure, I'd like that! Who wouldn't? But, I have no problem paying a co-pay for it, either. What I do have a problem with is my insurance company not covering it at all because of a religious belief I do not subscribe to, *especially* when it is for a valid medical reason!!!! Until these Catholic bishops spend any time with uncontrollable bleeding from their crotches, what they have to say about the issue means absolutely nothing to me.

In regards to Title X, that will remain a viable option for people as long as there is funding for it. If the GOP wins this election season, then we can all kiss that funding bye bye and say hello to women with horrible periods and other female problems, along with a lot of unplanned pregnancies, which will lead to a bigger need for services, more kids in schools that the GOP doesn't want to fund, and the list goes on and on and on....

Do you really want to live in *that* country???

KarenInWA

Yes, yes, Karen, the GOP boogyman is going to take away all of your reproductive rights. Yes, yes, vote Dems to keep your uterus rights intact.

Let me point out a few facts you are overlooking. The Title 10 benefits have been in place since 1970. Since 1970 we have had 3 GOP presidents for 5 terms of office. Funding is still intact and will remain intact. Planned Parenthood is an NGO that also offers abortion. Many rightly believe that should not be government funded.

How much do they cost, well look at USA Today and they are one of the sources quoting $9.00 a month. If you can't afford that, seek Title 10 assistance. Is USA an "uneducated" source Karen? Save your ad hominem attacks for someone else.

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2012-03-09/Birth-control-prices-range-widley-from-100-to-1000/53434126/1

Do you want to live in that country?  No, I don't want to live in a country where the president of the United States creates a false crises for political gain and then exploits a law student who is working with one of Obama's prior White House advisors, Anita Dunn, and her PR corporation to bring about angry calls by female voters based on absolute lies and duplicity. No, I don't want any part of that kind of country, but since I am not a 1percenter i am stuck with the country I have.

I am glad you brought up the medical issues of the alleged "friend" of Fluke who suffered such a thing. Ovarian cysts are a very common condition easily treated with a variety of medications, including OCPs as well as other medicines. In many cases, especially if the case involves endocrine abnormalities of the multiple ovarian cysts, a common diabetes medication is the drug of choice and not birth control pills. The cost for generic metformin is about $37.00 for a three month supply. Not knowing the basis of the alleged woman's underlying medical conditions who allegedly suffered a ruptured ovarian cyst (NO NAME WAS GIVEN), then it seems rather unlikely that the Catholic universities prohibition of contraceptives is the cause of her allegedly losing an ovary. Very shaky documentation that is based completely on unsubstantiated hearsay evidence. (I thought Fluke was a law student). Why didn't this other woman testify herself?

And the whole world of American women are suddenly on fire because of this alleged tragedy.

Sorry, you are being manipulated by a president who follows the rules of Alinsky to create polarizing situations and then exploit them. No, I don't want any part of that kind of country.

[Hemodoc]

I have a great deal of respect for people who love their faith and are true to it.  And I am extremely disappointed when I say that the Catholic Church as a man-made institution has been so abysmally inadequate in certain areas that I have little respect for its view on anything.  I believe that there is a profound difference between "the Catholic Church" and "Christianity", and the former does not always successfully represent the latter.

The Catholic Church has always been a misogynist institution that has historically been corrupt and probably still is.  I know a fair number of Catholics who believe the same way and were/are still horrified by the child sex abuse cases that have become so numerous that the Church is fodder for late-night talk show hosts.  I am innately suspicious of men in costumes.

I extend my apologies to anyone who finds offense in my comments.  Again, I am respectful of the Catholic faith but not necessarily in the institution.  I give little credence to any of their arguments.  I believe in God but I do not believe in bishops.

If they want to believe that this is about religious freedom, to them, perhaps maybe it is, but that doesn't mean that that is how the debate is defined for the rest of us. 

Why aren't the Catholic bishops complaining about how the wages they pay to their employees could conceivably (haha...pun alert!) be used to buy birth control?  Catholic employers are forced to pay wages, and if they are used to pay for pills, well, why isn't THAT a problem?  How far is this religious freedom supposed to go?

Dear Michelle,

I think I understand what you are stating and yes, I do believe that there is a line of division between true Christianity based only on the teachings of the Bible and the doctrines and creeds of Catholicism based in large part upon tradition and extra-biblical sources. The American founding fathers rightly gave us freedom OF religion understanding that true Christianity is based on choice alone. God has given us the Bible as a large part of the evidence that He truly exists and has a great love for the people of the earth. He is also a righteous judge that sent His only begotten Son to pay the righteous penalty for our sins. People are free to believe and choose to follow His Son or to reject Him. Free choice. Either Jesus pays for your sins, or you do.

It is also a well established legal and ethical doctrine that religious objection to moral issues is covered by our freedom OF religion. There are of course limits on that expression especially in the cases of parents refusing medical care to their children who are not old enough to make that choice for themselves for instance. While I don't personally support many of the doctrines and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church, I do support their moral convictions and their first amendment rights to adhere to those policies. No one is forced to work at a Catholic institution. You are free to apply and accept that position. No one forces a student to attend a Catholic university. You are free to apply and attend if extended that invitation.

Anyone that would place themselves in that situation voluntarily and then demand that the religious institution which has the right to engage in higher education must change their religious convictions to meet the demands of a person at that institution freely of their own accord is an endangerment to freedom OF religion in this nation. Once again, if the alleged person in this alleged and undocumented story was that poor to not be able to afford generic OCP's or generic Metformin depending on the underlying condition, then she would have been eligible for Title 10 coverage which has been the law and will continue to be the law since 1970.

The revelation that Sandra Fluke is working with Anita Dunn who was a member of Obama's White House and how Obama has played on this whole discourse that is unconstitutional and won't stand up to legal challenge makes just one in a long list of political ploys by this president.

[cariad]

So, go tell all of your lady friends with a uterus to seek title 10 coverage if they can't afford 9 dollars a month to pay for it themselves.

You mean my female friends? This is really creeping me out the way you seem fixated on mentioning women's reproductive organs in every response to me, even though I have made it clear that I find this disrespectful. You have been told repeatedly that your smarmy comments are not appreciated in the least yet you seem to revel in the thought of personally offending me and at least one other woman on this site. You do not know a single thing about me and have no place professing to be some sort of expert on the veracity of my feelings. There is something so unsettling in the image of a grown man googling 'uterus' in a desperate attempt to win an online argument in the most obnoxious manner possible. It reminds me of the callers who would ring up my parents' home because they knew young girls lived there, say a few dirty words, then hang up.

You seem to have all the respect for women such as myself as you have for IHD:

Fair enough Karol, that wasn't my impression by our prior PM's as well as those of other moderators and admin, but out of respect for you and IHD, I will never participate on any political threads ever again. Let them blast away at all of the Christians as much as they wish, I won't defend that position ever again on IHD. I apologize for my mistaken impression of your prior PMs.

Oh well, I guess it's pretty good company to be in!

Maybe, cariad, you should start a new thread in which each of us could post our own "You're just a woman" story.

I think one is being written right before our eyes, MM.  

I have to get my two little boys to bed, but I do want to take at a stab at the other topics that you brought up. I am about to drop, though, and I have to pack up the family to SoCal in the near future, so it may have to keep. I need to actually engage my brain to talk to you, so that takes more effort. I did see a headline that North Korea was suspending their nuclear program or something, which, based on the book I just finished was supposed to be next to impossible. This author really did not think that America would ever understand their culture clearly enough, and that the North Koreans had boxed themselves into an ideological corner that would not allow them to drop the program and save face. I'll have to read up on what transpired before commenting further.