February 29, 2012


Georgetown co-ed: Please pay for us to have sex … We’re going broke buying birth control

POSTED AT 1:55 PM ON FEBRUARY 28, 2012 BY TINA KORBE

  
At a hearing of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee yesterday, a single witness — Georgetown law student and “reproductive rights activist” Sandra Fluke — told sympathetic policy-makers that the administration’s so-called contraception mandate should stand … because her peers are going broke buying birth control.
“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown student insurance not covering contraception),” Fluke reported.
It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school, according to her calculations.
“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing.
Craig Bannister at CNSNews.com did the math — and discovered that these co-eds, assuming they’re using the cheapest possible contraception, must be having sex about three times a day every day to incur that kind of expense. What Fluke is arguing, then, is that her fellow law students have a right to consequence-free sex whenever, wherever. Why, exactly, especially if it costs other people something? When I can’t pay for something, I do without it. Fortunately, in the case of contraception, women can make lifestyle choices that render it unnecessary.
At one point, Fluke mentions a friend who felt “embarrassed and powerless” when she learned her insurance didn’t cover contraception. Can you imagine how proud and empowered that same friend would be if she learned she has the ability to resist her own sexual urges? We can only assume she doesn’t know that because Fluke and she both labor under the illusion that contraception is a medical necessity.
Some little part of Fluke must recognize that it’s not … because she sought to bolster her argument with an example of an illness in which contraception might be a medically necessary treatment. Another friend of hers, she said, has polycystic ovarian syndrome, for which contraception is a common treatment. Some insurance programs that don’t cover contraception normally would nevertheless cover it as a treatment for PCOS — but other insurance programs wouldn’t. Fluke makes it sound like contraception is the only treatment for PCOS. In fact, it isn’t — and contraception is prescribed as a treatment only when the woman also wants to contracept. Fluke says her friend is a lesbian — and so wouldn’t need contraception. Why didn’t she opt for any of the other treatments, then?
At the end of her testimony, Fluke spoke in strong language of her resentment of university administrators and others who suggest she should have chosen to attend a different university that would have offered student insurance that does cover contraception — even if that other university wasn’t quite as prestigious as Georgetown.
“We refuse to pick between a quality education and our health and we resent that, in the 21st Century, anyone thinks it’s acceptable to ask us to make that choice simply because we are women,” Fluke said.
Ms. Fluke, I resent that you think women are incapable of controlling themselves, of sacrificing temporary pleasure for the sake of long-term success. You make us sound like animals, slaves to our instincts and able to be used, but we’re better than that. We’re persons, equal to men in dignity and love.

@thelarrydoyle Before today, I never heard of you. So, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and take you at your word. That being you were not attacking the Catholic Church or 1.1 billion Catholics only Santorum's views of Catholicism.

If you are really telling the truth about that then you should write what is good about the religion & the church. I went back and read everything I could find that you wrote on the net not in books. I am not seeing any positive remarks about religion, the Catholic Church or Catholics.

If you to look at ANY religion you could find weird, funny or scary things about it. If you are going to make fun of 1.1 billion Catholics & their Catholic religious rituals,  I am pretty sure you could find a lot of funny things to write about Islam and it's 72 virgins etc. To be fair & prove people they are wrong about you then you should write a satire about Islam.

I have a problem with so-called comedians who write or do satire that is actually hate speech that gets cover when they say it's satire. There is a very fine line between being satirical & hate speech. To me funny satire is when you know the person doing the satire does not really believe in the 'funny', horrible things they are saying. In your case we have no way of knowing if you are just spewing hate and using satire as a cover, if someone takes offense or you are just being funny.

You have to admit that Christianity & Catholics have been the target of a lot of hate speech in America lately. So, when you write what you did, it just seems like you are piling on and taking cheap shots. This whole issue with Catholics & Santorum was all started because Obama wanted to distract Americans from the bad economy and make a BIG issue out of free birth control pills when it was NEVER an issue before January 7, 2012.

LARRY DOYLE COMPLETE ASSHOLE





LARRY DOYLE
COMPLETE ASSHOLE
WHO NEEDS TO BE EXCOMMUNICATED FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Larry Doyle

GET UPDATES FROM LARRY DOYLE

The Jesus-Eating Cult of Rick Santorum

Posted: 02/24/2012 2:13 pm

2012-02-23-SacredHeart.JPG
It's time to take a good hard look at Rick Santorum's faith.
Many of you will be shocked to learn what our possible future president believes, who he answers to, the bloody jihads his so-called church has carried on for centuries, and its current role as the tactical arm of the North American Man-Boy Love Association.
As a former member of same sect (an Irish-Catholic, the worst kind), I have read the texts, participated in the rites, and even seen behind the curtain, as it were, as a one-time altar boy, so help me. I managed to escape, but then, Santorum is in much deeper than I ever was.
Unlike Christians, Santorum and his fellow Roman Catholics participate in a barbaric ritual dating back two millennia, a "mass" in which a black-robed cleric casts a spell over some bread and wine, transfiguring it into the actual living flesh and blood of their Christ. Followers then line up to eat the Jesus meat and drink his holy blood in a cannibalistic reverie not often seen outside Cinemax.
Roman Catholics like Santorum take their orders from "the Pope," a high priest who, they believe, chats with God. Santorum has made no secret of his plans to implement his leader's dicta on allowed uses of vaginas and anuses, but has said little about what additional dogma he will be compelled to obey. Will child killers and terrorists go unexecuted on the Pope's say-so? Will we be able to conduct our wars as we see fit, or only the "just" ones? If Santorum is a good Catholic, and he appears to be among the very best, our real president with be Benedict XVI (a "former" Nazi, by the way).
Santorum has also remained silent on his religious organization's various reigns of terror, in which good protestants and others were tortured and killed in imaginatively grisly ways. Even more chilling is a possible connection between the Roman Catholic Church pedophile program and NAMBLA, which I discovered after conducting some research on the internet.
Ordinarily I would be loathe to discuss all this, feeling that issues of faith and religion should be kept out of politics. But it's far too late for that, and I have an obligation to expose this phony theology that threatens to supplant Christianity as our official national religion.
Need I remind you that only once in our great history has a Roman Catholic been elected president, and how tragically it ended?