Fluke enjoyed a "lovely trip to Barcelona" before asking for free birth control.

[Dragon]

We have a one percenter attending a Jesuit law school whining that she can't get birth control from her school's insurance.

\

Wrong.

 

[g5000]

What did conz say about libs when Romney made offhand comments about his wealth?


Oh...yeah....I remember now.




ENVY!!!


How LOW you've sunk. You're as bad as LIBS now.

I have no idea who you are babbling at with your non sequiturs.

Perhaps you should sober up before embarassing yourself any further.

And I'm sorry to make your butt hurt for outing Fluke as a liar to Congress that you have to resort to heavy drinking.

 

[L.K.Eder]

barcelona is great. i will go there again in september. good for the fluke.

and congratulations for this bizarro-scoop, allie.

 

[Dragon]

If that's the case, Dragon then Ms. Fluke would be best served not to make statements like the following:

Why? I'm perfectly capable of understanding that she was using a particular case as an illustration to point out a principle, and that she was talking about the principle rather than asking for something for herself alone.

Why is it so hard for YOU to figure that out?

 

[g5000]

If that's the case, Dragon then Ms. Fluke would be best served not to make statements like the following:

Why? I'm perfectly capable of understanding that she was using a particular case as an illustration to point out a principle, and that she was talking about the principle rather than asking for something for herself alone.

Why is it so hard for YOU to figure that out?

Wow. An actual excuse for Fluke making shit up! Amazing.

Why is it so hard to figure out that Fluke lied, and if she lied about her own personal situation, that she was probably lying about her second- or third-hand testimony?

Her entire testimony is shot to pieces with her integrity.

 

[koshergrl]

Are there family planning clinics in every city of the United States?

There are county health departments in every county, and those county health departments all have access to free contraception.

Anyway, logical fallacy. Has nothing to do wtih anything.

I'm afraid it shoots holes in your "free contraception is available everywhere" argument

I didn't say that. I said in her area.

If you're talking about a different conversation, at a different time, in a different thread, take yourself to that thread and comment on it.

 

[BlindBoo]

Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an entire summer’s salary.

Transcript of testimony by Sandra Fluke

Where was she asking for it to be free?

 

[rightwinger]

There are county health departments in every county, and those county health departments all have access to free contraception.

Anyway, logical fallacy. Has nothing to do wtih anything.

I'm afraid it shoots holes in your "free contraception is available everywhere" argument

I didn't say that. I said in her area.

If you're talking about a different conversation, at a different time, in a different thread, take yourself to that thread and comment on it.

She was asking for coverage for ALL women not just the women in her area

 

[koshergrl]

I know?

 

[Dragon]

Wow. An actual excuse for Fluke making shit up! Amazing.

Whether Fluke was telling the truth in the examples she presented, and whether there is an excuse for that, is irrelevant to this thread and no concern of mine here.

All I am saying here is that the fact she was able to take a trip to Spain MEANS NOTHING. I am particularly riding this bullshit because I have seen it brought out before, e.g. about Occupy, and it's absolute garbage. People advocating for a cause are asking for something for EVERYONE, not just for themselves. Offering advice to improve their personal situation, or pointing out that their personal situation is fine and needs no attention, is completely bogus and needs to get the smack-down whenever it's presented.

Nor does the validity of Fluke's argument that contraceptives should be required coverage in health-care policies depend on whether she, personally, was being completely honest in her testimony. That might be relevant to an assessment of her character, but not to the validity of the cause she's advocating for. So unless you're writing her biography, or you're mad at her for stealing your boyfriend, there's no good reason for you to harp on it.

What all of this says to me is that the opponents of covering birth control can't make their cases without resort to logical fallacies.

 

[bucs90]

What I'm laughing at, Dragon...is that if you READ Fluke's testimony...she admits that her "friend" IS covered for that prescription under Georgetown's health insurance policy.

You still don't get it at all.

Look, remember Martin Luther King's famous speech, the "I have a dream" speech? In that speech, he talked about a world where one day his children would be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Now, is it your impression that he was talking ONLY about his kids? If somehow a special dispensation against the provisions of Jim Crow could have been issued to the King family, do you think he'd have been satisfied with that? Or do you think maybe, just maybe, he was trying to accomplish something for ALL African-Americans?

If you can make that mind-stretch in regard to King and civil rights, why can't you make it in regard to Fluke and reproductive rights? Whether you agree with her or not, can't you see that whether SHE HERSELF can afford birth control and family planning services DOESN'T MEAN SQUAT?

Did I really just read someone comparing that slut to MLK?

The left has no shame.

 

[bucs90]

Wow. An actual excuse for Fluke making shit up! Amazing.

Whether Fluke was telling the truth in the examples she presented, and whether there is an excuse for that, is irrelevant to this thread and no concern of mine here.

All I am saying here is that the fact she was able to take a trip to Spain MEANS NOTHING. I am particularly riding this bullshit because I have seen it brought out before, e.g. about Occupy, and it's absolute garbage. People advocating for a cause are asking for something for EVERYONE, not just for themselves. Offering advice to improve their personal situation, or pointing out that their personal situation is fine and needs no attention, is completely bogus and needs to get the smack-down whenever it's presented.

Nor does the validity of Fluke's argument that contraceptives should be required coverage in health-care policies depend on whether she, personally, was being completely honest in her testimony. That might be relevant to an assessment of her character, but not to the validity of the cause she's advocating for. So unless you're writing her biography, or you're mad at her for stealing your boyfriend, there's no good reason for you to harp on it.

What all of this says to me is that the opponents of covering birth control can't make their cases without resort to logical fallacies.

Using your logic, that would mean it's ok for George W Bush to lie about WMD's in Iraq, not because he personally wanted that war, but because millions of Iraqis wanted the freedom.



Since when has the left found it acceptable to lie in front of Congress, so long as lots of people might desire the end result?

Oh, right, since 01/20/2009.

 

[Dragon]

Using your logic, that would mean it's ok for George W Bush to lie about WMD's in Iraq, not because he personally wanted that war, but because millions of Iraqis wanted the freedom.

LOL well, let's just say that whether Bush lied has no bearing on whether there actually were WMDs in Iraq, or whether we should have gone to war there, unless Bush was our only source for that information which he wasn't. It was not "OK," but it was irrelevant to the question, and that's what I'm saying about Fluke.

The remainder of your post continues to exhibit this confusion between character assessment (to which the question of lying is appropriate) and evaluation of a cause (to which it's not).

 

[AmericanFirst]

I don't get your point?

Point is Fluke is a fluke. You never get anyone's point. She is a typical lefty socialist nutjob.

 

[Dragon]

Did I really just read someone comparing that slut to MLK?

No, you really just read someone comparing Fluke's advocacy of a right for ALL WOMEN to King's advocacy of a right for ALL BLACK PEOPLE.

As for the personal comparison, I would be on much stronger ground to call King a "slut" than Fluke, frankly. We KNOW that he slept around a lot; we DON'T know that about Fluke. Although that, of course, is completely irrelevant to the validity of King's cause. Or Fluke's.

 

[Dragon]

I don't get your point?

Point is Fluke is a fluke. You never get anyone's point. She is a typical lefty socialist nutjob.

If that's really the point, then it belongs on a bathroom wall, not here. It's pretty much a pointless point.

 

[bucs90]

Using your logic, that would mean it's ok for George W Bush to lie about WMD's in Iraq, not because he personally wanted that war, but because millions of Iraqis wanted the freedom.

LOL well, let's just say that whether Bush lied has no bearing on whether there actually were WMDs in Iraq, or whether we should have gone to war there, unless Bush was our only source for that information which he wasn't. It was not "OK," but it was irrelevant to the question, and that's what I'm saying about Fluke.

The remainder of your post continues to exhibit this confusion between character assessment (to which the question of lying is appropriate) and evaluation of a cause (to which it's not).

If the premise was so valid, why would she need to lie about it to prove her case?

Answer: Because the premise was weak. Birth control from WalMart is VERY affordable. My GF pays $10 a month. If a person cant find $10 a month, they probably shouldn't be having sex. Because pills are 99% effective, which means 1% of those women who can't afford $10 are gonna end up with a little baby human that costs much more than that per month.

 

[bucs90]

Did I really just read someone comparing that slut to MLK?

No, you really just read someone comparing Fluke's advocacy of a right for ALL WOMEN to King's advocacy of a right for ALL BLACK PEOPLE.

As for the personal comparison, I would be on much stronger ground to call King a "slut" than Fluke, frankly. We KNOW that he slept around a lot; we DON'T know that about Fluke. Although that, of course, is completely irrelevant to the validity of King's cause. Or Fluke's.

Fluke wants women to not have to pay $10 a month for their own pills, but rather have all of us pay it (while they take European vacations apparantely).

King wanted black people to stop being lynched, murdered, raped, denied access to public buildings and buses, etc, etc, etc, by mobs of racist people in the 60's.

Yep. I totally see the similarity.

 

[Dragon]

If the premise was so valid, why would she need to lie about it to prove her case?

That's a question to ask her, and only if it's any of your business which it isn't. Whether women should be covered for birth control is a question completely separate from Fluke's character.

Or did you think she was the only person advocating this?

 

[Dragon]

King wanted black people to stop being lynched, murdered, raped, denied access to public buildings and buses, etc, etc, etc, by mobs of racist people in the 60's.

Yep. I totally see the similarity.

The similarity is a THINKING matter: both are advocacy of a right for EVERYONE, not a special dispensation for ONE person.

The difference is a FEELING matter: one of them makes you feel differently than the other.

Apparently you can't understand the similarity because you're a feeling type, not a thinking type, and your emotional reaction to the two gets in the way of your thought processes. Nevertheless, the similarity is real and pertinent to this thread, while your feelings about the two issues respectively are not.