It’s a good time to be a woman in the United States.
I’m quite convinced of that despite the debacle that is going on all around us.
Look at what we did just one month ago when the Komen Foundation announced its plans to end funding to Planned Parenthood for mammograms.
Most of us lit up like firecrackers, gathered together and within days those behind that disastrous decision had resigned and the funding was reinstated.
And truthfully, we didn’t even have to throw a real punch — our reaction was so swift and determined that the powers-that-be saw the error of their ways almost immediately and didn’t even put up a fight.
Girls fight a bit differently than boys.
And while girls and women may on occasion have tendencies to backstab and cat-fight to a degree, there is nothing that will bring us together more quickly than a common enemy.
Enter Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, his best bud and campaign sugar daddy, Foster Friess, popular conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, and the conservative right’s attack on women’s reproductive health.
Friess, you may recall, during an interview with CBS’ Leslie Stahl of all people, said this: “This contraception thing — my gosh, it’s so inexpensive. You know back in my days they used a Bayer aspirin for contraception. The gals put it between their knees and it wasn’t that costly.”
Then, of course, this week Limbaugh not only called a Georgetown University law student a slut and a prostitute because she is an advocate of mandatory employer health coverage of contraception, he urged her to videotape herself having “all of this sex” and post it online publicly.
All I can say, ladies, is that as we continue to face this ridiculous stir-up in the halls of Congress, our best weapon in the battle most likely will be men behaving badly and pompously. And I predict that once again we will hardly have to throw a punch — because so many of them are so good at it and so damn anxious to get a shot at it that they trip over each other on the way to the microphone.
And while these guys keep at it, look who we have on the other side of the spectrum.
First there is that Georgetown University law student, who when asked about Limbaugh’s comments, mustered great grace and dignity and said, “All he needs to know is that it was really inappropriate. This is outside the bounds of civil discourse.”
Whether I agree with every detail of her pitch regarding employer-paid contraception or not, she’s a good one to have on the side of the women’s reproductive rights issue.
Then of course we have U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe, who thankfully voted against the Blunt amendment, which would have expanded the “conscience” exemptions to President Obama’s new birth control coverage rule.
The amendment would have allowed not only religious groups but any employer to refuse to provide not only birth control coverage but any health services at all that are required under the law.
As is not uncommon with Maine’s longtime and now outgoing senator, she broke from her party to vote her own conscience.
Did you know that Snowe and Maine’s other U.S. senator, Susan Collins, don’t really like each other all that much? They served together all those years in Washington and it wasn’t until last May that a special report in The Washington Post disclosed that well-kept secret.
I wasn’t necessarily happy to learn that, but in a way it made me quite proud. Those of us outside their inner circles never knew it. Why? Because they still managed to work together and communicate with one another in a civil and professional manner.
They are ladies — hardworking, dedicated, smart, kind, grown-up ladies.
It’s terribly sad to see Snowe leaving, especially as discouraged as she clearly is. But she deserves to go. She did a good job for a long time. She did her duty well.
We can only hope that whoever we choose to replace her will have the same dignity, work ethic and maturity that she had.
Whether it’s a lady or not.
Andrea Mitchell, not Leslie Stahl. Otherwise, good stuff!
Hard to see what the point of this piece was. The distance between Snowe and Collins has been out there for years. As for that “lady” who goes to Georgetown, was looking for trouble from the start. She said she knew about their policy on non coverage of contraceptives prior to enrolling, and that whole story about her “friend” uncorroborated and suspicious. If it were true, she must be among the most helpless and just plain dumb folks to ever walk the planet.
it only takes “one plain dumb folk” to know another when she sees one.
Oh, I may be dumb, but I do not attend a prestigious $65,000 year university but can’t afford $8.00 a month for OCPs. Liar.
many poor students attend college on scholarships, many students are at college on a mixture of scholarship money and loans and almost every red cent they may possibly make working while going to college maybe paying on loans, or rent? Is it acceptable for one of them to become seriously ill due to a medication that they couldn’t afford, and end up costing the insurer even more money? Would it be better for them to become pregnant, drop out, owe money on loans and end up on welfare? Or perhaps you would rather they had an abortion? $8 a month is ramen noodle supply, which many college students end up living on.
Geez Louise on a crutch. One more time. These religious – sponsored insurance programs cover the use of OCPs for medical, non contraceptive uses e.g. polycystic ovarian disease. Ms. Fluke’s “friend” , if she actually exists, has a great cause for legal action against Georgetown if indeed she was denied for this use and suffered harm as a result. If she wanted contraception, her local Planned Parenthood abortion mill would be happy to supply her OCPs for free.
Too easy,and sensible. But they want what they want when they want it,and on some one else’s dime.
I love you!
Such extraordinary common sense.
Are you married?
I am 60 years old. When I was 19 I decided I wanted to have sex with my long-time boyfriend. We were afraid of pregnancy. I did the responsible thing. I went to Planned Parenthood and got on the pill. I am proud of myself that I had the intelligence and forethought to do that.
Thank you, Planned Parenthood, for being there.
My daughter is now 25. If Rick Santorum becomes president, I am strongly encouraging her to leave this country because as a woman she will be denied her rights.
Please, people. Do not vote for a Republican for any office ever again. They are old, white men who want liberty only for themselves. They want to control any ‘other’ including women and minorities. For all their religious wrappings, they are truly despicable people.
Thanks to you for reaffirming my point that contraception is available in the US. All I can say about your strongly encouraging your daughter to leave the U.S. if Mr. Santorum is elected President is, “Wow” According to the Guttmacher Institute, 89% of women who do not want to become pregnant are using contraception. If that fails, there is always the fallback of the 22% of all pregnancies in the US that end up in abortion (much higher for the people of color communities). I highly doubt that any President could make much of a dent in these millions of lives lost. What does that say about our society?
If Mr. Santorum becomes president all women will have a lot to worry about and rights will be lost. Of course, the NDAA has taken away our most basic right to freedom. There are many reasons for a young person to leave. America is foundering, listing on it’s side and taking on water. At some point there will be no way to right her.
I would be most afraid of the US debt getting absolutely out of control, to the point of seizing all private wealth via taxation and inflation, more than taking contraceptives off the shelf. But where to go? Taiwan? Monaco? Let us start a new thread, where would you go?
Maybe the Insurance companies ought to pay for the football player’s helmets so the don’t get injured, drop out, owe money on loans and end up on welfare? Or perhaps you would rather they just play without the helmets. I know what they could do, don’t play football or buy their own helmet.
If that amendment had gone through, the employers would have been able to cherry-pick what their employees’ health insurance policies pay for–to a degree that would go far beyond birth control. They could refuse to pay for any sort of sports-related head injury, for example. Then, if you or your child wanted to play sports, you’d have to pay out of pocket for a rider covering head injuries.
Has Ms. Ordway considered the absurdity of a woman — attending a $65,000 a year university — testifying before Congress that she can’t afford to have sex as often as she’d like, and therefore it is obviously the federal government’s responsibility to buy her birth control pills FOR her?
The left’s war on fertility is likely to have its greatest success in reducing the fertility of left-leaning women, thereby ensuring that future generations are more conservative.
Right, because that’s exactly what the student said. Try turning down your Limbaugh noise maker and review the transcript.
Huh?
Sandra Fluke wanted to testify about some of the medical conditions she saw fellow female students go through, which could have been controlled through the use of the birth control pill.
Even if the student or anyone else for that matter, was taking the BC so that they could have sex with out becoming pregnant, it’s much, much cheaper for an insurer to cover BC than to cover the cost of having a child. Cuts back on abortions too. Even so, that’s between them and their doctor and none of your business.
Correct,so she can pay the 10 bucks herself and keep it between her and the Doctor.
The debate was crafted so that it hinged on birth control. But the result of the legislation, if it had passed, would have been for your employer to be able to slash your health insurance coverage for ANY procedure or condition, as long as they claimed they had religious reasons for doing so.
You’re so right.
Those dastardly employers should have no say in what our Government requires of them.
How dare they!
They accept Federal money. Therefore, they must obey Federal rules.
If the Catholic church would like to be able to dictate what types of health care it will include in its employees’ health insurance, all it has to do is stop accepting Federal funds.
Yes, and pay property and income taxes. That should take care of the deficit rather quickly.
I agree this Bill was a rushed attempt to fix one of the many problems with Obama care. I guess it boils down to if you think these new ,invented rights ,are more important than the ones that have been specifically outlined and guaranteed in our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Watch her “testimony” ,then maybe you will see how ridiculous it was/is.For some extra fun,watch the idiot behind her and his moronic reactions.Would be funny ,wait…it is funny.
Isn’t your conclusion what you want to happen? Then support birth control.
Fluke was testifying about a friend of hers who had been prescribed birth control pills to treat polycystic ovarian syndrome–a medical condition. The friend could not afford to pay for the pills and her insurance did not cover them. Her medical condition worsened, and she lost an ovary.
Limbaugh transformed this fact into Fluke supposedly needing lots of contraceptives in order to have lots of sex, and slandered her as a prostitute.
Incidentally, ONE prescripton of birth control pills (one pill per day) prevents pregnancy. It is not necessary to take an additional pill each time a person has sex. Rush doesn’t seem to know that and neither do you, apparently.
Go listen to some Rush and spew more ditto head points … This a page from his radio script. Do you even know how birth control works? It’s not based on how much sex you have …
Where in he testimony do you find her saying that? Because she never said anything like that.
She discussed the near death of her friend who couldn’t afford a prescription for the pill and so she bled to death. She discussed the cost to insurance companies of the pill vs. a live birth. Only on Rush’s show, with doctored tapes, did she ever mention herself and sex in the same paragraph. Listen, unless you listen to her testimony, don’t go by the lies spewed by this vulgar man. It shows that your mind is only open to what that corpulent druggie says.
Way to whip up the liberal feminist movement Renee. This whole issue was not about denying women the right to use contraceptives; it was about government paying for non-essential services. Why should people pay an extra tax to provide contraceptives to a promiscuous female law student? What is next? Should the government provide free Viagra to all men? What about male and female enhancements? What about dating services? What about a clothing allowance for those dates? At some point the foolish government spending must end or we will end up like Greece.
what about the fact that the pill is used for medical conditions and not just birth control? There are quite a few medical reasons one would take the pill for. How about stop assuming that a woman who is on the pill is promiscuous?
Viagra is covered by health insurers, which by the way is not only for erectile dysfunction, but also for other medical reasons. The government is not the one to be covering birth control, the insurers would be.
Now, let’s give you something else to think about….how much would it cost insurers to cover the costs of birth control in comparison to how much it would cost an insurer to cover the cost of having a baby…from prenatal care, to the age of at least 18?
Pft, it would probably also cut back on dead beat fathers who cost the tax payers a bit of money too. How about the fact that it will help cut back on welfare, abortions etc…
Right, right, and Obamacare will be a bargain….. oops = it just ran over budget by 111 Billion dollars and it’s hardly swung into action yet. Wait until all the bottom-feeders figure out how to really take advantage of it (including women who want free contraceptives who could otherwise easily afford it) and then see how out of control it will be. Once you start having the government cover the costs of something and people take advantage of it, the market demands more for that product because the government is too stupid to not overpay – thus this whole issue will end up making contraceptives cost more in a similar way that health care is too expensive because providers are constantly adjusting for freeloaders, unfunded government mandates, and government waste. Good job mindless feminists – you’re foiling yourselves again!
Having to purchase health insurance from a for-profit corporation is certainly no bargain.
As Physicians for a National Health Program point out, “The U.S. spends twice as much as other industrialized nations on health care, $8,160 per capita. Yet our system performs poorly in comparison and still leaves 50 million without health coverage and millions more inadequately covered. This is because private insurance bureaucracy and paperwork consume one-third (31 percent) of every health care dollar. Streamlining payment through a single nonprofit payer would save more than $400 billion per year, enough to provide comprehensive, high-quality coverage for all Americans.”
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-resources
There is absolutely no incentive for doctors and hospitals to charge reasonable prices. They do not now, and do not want us to know what they charge as long as they can hide behind the big bad insurance companies. Single payer will allow prices of care to continue to skyrocket. It would save no money. Of course the doctors want to be guaranteed payment no matter what they charge. They’re the rich ones.
I believe the American Medical Association is against health insurance reform, out of concern that it will REDUCE their income.
PNHP favors single-payer national health insurance, despite this possibility.
They note, “Currently, the U.S. health care system is outrageously expensive, yet inadequate. Despite spending more than twice as much as the rest of the industrialized nations ($8,160 per capita), the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates. Moreover, the other advanced nations provide comprehensive coverage to their entire populations, while the U.S. leaves 51 million completely uninsured and millions more inadequately covered.
“The reason we spend more and get less than the rest of the world is because we have a patchwork system of for-profit payers. Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans’ health dollars.
“Single-payer financing is the only way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $400 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do.
Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.
“Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards.
“A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste.”
Government wouldn’t be covering contraceptives, insurances were/are going to be forced to provide it (if they didn’t), as they already do with Viagra. No one said anything about extra tax to “provide contraceptives to a promiscuous female.” What is really sad here is that you assume only promiscuous females use contraceptives. (And who really decides what promiscuous is? You?) As Ms. Fluke was prepared to testify, there is a whole plethora of women who use oral contraceptives for medical reasons. They are used in the treatment of endometriosis, polycystic ovary syndrome and the list goes on. “The whole issue” was actually about religious freedom, not “non-essential services”. Blunt decided to add an amendment that was worded so vaguely that any employer could refuse any type of coverage for any condition, not just contraception, and use the excuse of moral grounds. It just so happened that contraception became the focal point.
So women are responsible for the collapse of the Greek economy, bailouts, fears for the Euro, and the stability of world markets. Maybe the republicans can get the air force to parachute in loads of aspirins and rosaries to restore stability.
So you think it’s ok for the goverment to pay to bring these lives into the world, and pay for them for at least the next 5 years while the mother who sits home and collects TANF and FS. I personally do not believe in abortion however, it should left up to the person. If I couldn’t afford to have a child I would make sure that I used birth control. I see nothing wrong with the government paying for this or for birth control. Religion and politics do not mix, and if you feel they should then we need to start taxing these churches and they should no longer be tax exempt.
most do pay for Viagra,so you already loss the argument.
This issue was about whether or not your employer should have the right to strip away parts of your healthcare coverage to suit themselves, as long as they claim it’s on religious grounds… in other words, whether or not employers should have the right to force their religious beliefs on you.
However the gov. strip away medical benefits to it military,and veterans, which include, doe we need to do that operation because of his/her age and health.
If you want to go have sex, then it is your responsibility to provide the things to do it., Not the govt, not your neighbor, ect… it was said the insurance companies have to provide the for free, so who do you think is going to pay for it. Not the insurance company, that cost will be passed on to the businees and employees.
What is missed here is the individual responsibility, go to planed parenthood, or here in Maine Penquis Cap, and get free/reduced contraception. Which would be way less the $3000
Everyone always says “run to Planned Parenthood or Penquis.” Do any of you financially support either of these places? You do realize they don’t just magically produce contraceptives in a back room? They need to be FUNDED. People PAY for health insurance, it isn’t just given out by the employers for free. People who are covered pay premiums. Planned Parenthood and Penquis are not insurance companies, they don’t get the benefit of the insurance premiums.
I pay my insurance premiums. Why should I not have the right to have those applied to what is medically necessary for me? I am pretty sure your Viagra would be covered for you.
It all depends on you plan. One plan I was covered by did pay for Viagra with a co-pay, not free. The last private plan I was covered by did not pay period. Mecicare drug coverage will not pay either period. (Not a matter of getting my head straight but prostate cancer)
That is too bad to hear DavidHa, I am sorry to hear that. You are the male example of why things like this shouldn’t be ostracized. I understand Viagra is used for purposes other than sex. Unfortunately, most people don’t. Once the word “sex” is attached to it, it is suddenly flung from medication to recreational drug. It is the same thing with contraception for women. In this case though, the female contraception is the one on trial. (To be fair, I would be just as outspoken on men’s issues in this matter as well).
The goverment would be paying a lot less for contaceptives….then it would an unwanted child.
So when did the insurance companies become part of the Government?
Shows how much you know.Just following the herder and repeating what you have been told.
Answer: when the government started telling them what they HAVE to pay for….
Prescription medication. How do yiu separate those who need it for birth control and those who use it for Acne control … Yes, Acne. Cystic, scarring, painful Acne …. No wonder the rest of the civilized world laughs at America.
Must be why so many millions from around the world are waiting in very long lines to move here.
Yes, the civilized world laughs at us, but it is because we allow something like the Catholic Church and other non-medical actors to run our medical insurance. They laugh because the policies of the Republicans gets us into wars for no reason. they laugh because we allow serial womanizers like David Vitter (R., Sen. LA) to sit in judgement of women’s rights. They laugh because we are still debating birth control pills in 2012.
Obama=failure on gas prices, employment and healthcare. So the liberals create a fake controversy to detract everyone from his disaster of a presidency. Renee, your being played like a harmonica.
Failure on gas prices? What do you mean? Do you think the president controls gas prices?
Here are some facts. The US now exports more refined petroleum products than it imports. We are even exporting more gasoline than we burn in this country.
The oil companies are shutting down 3 refineries in the Philadelphia area, including the Sunoco refinery that is the largest in the northeast.
There are now more drilling rigs operating in the US than there were 4 years ago.
So how do these facts add up to the president “failing” om gas prices? Do you think he should put an embargo on oil exports? Because any more oil we find here just gets exported. That is the reason the big pipeline from the tar sands of Canada goes to TX. Not only will it feed the refineries there, but it will be exported through the TX ports.
Obama…never to blame for anything according to the liberals.
Obama..no to offshore drilling, no to the Keystone Pipeline.
Stop lying Democrats and start doing something about the high gas prices Obama and your EPA have caused.
You might want to do some research before posting. See http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/is-obama-to-blame-for-4-gasoline/.
Also, how convenient for conservatives to forget the spike in oil prices when Bush was in office. The truth is, the president has very little, if any, influence on the price of oil.
And here’s food for thought: If you were to fill your vehicle’s fuel tank with ink that you buy for your printer at home, it would cost you more than $100,000.
Not a fact to go on, but you keep spewing your inane thoughts.
The President sets the tone of a business-friendly vs. business unfriendly climate by changing regulations, taxes, etc. His decision to nix the Keystone oil pipeline for example. He did so, not so much because of environmental concerns about the pipeline itself, but due to concerns that by increasing the supply of oil flowing into the US, the price of petroleum products will fall, and we will burn more of them, which offends the sensibilities of his quiche and brie supporters that want to see 8 to 10 dollar a gallon gas like the enlightened Europeans have. That may be fine for gasoline, but whatchagonna do for the poor, elderly, differently-abled, single mothers who got pregnant solely because they could not get free contraception, and other assorted downtrodden among us in Northern Maine who heat their homes with fuel oil when it goes to 10 bucks per? Move them to $280,000 units in downtown Portland, all paid for magically by someone else, preferably a nasty 1%er?
News Flash, the oil flowing through the Keystone pipeline is for export.
Did you not understand when I wrote that the oil companies are closing 3 refineries in the Northeast because they claim they are not making any money on them. There are other newer refineries that get more from a barrel of oil.
So the oil companies are saying they are not making enough money with gasoline at 3.80/gal. Because gas in Europe is 6.00 and more, they can make more money refining it here and sending tanker loads to Europe. This is where the profits are.
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2012/03/02/report-shutdown-of-refineries-will-mean-fuel-price-hikes-along-east-coast/
Shrug, I’ll stand by my statement that Obama and cronies want 10 buck a gallon gas, like Europe, which will devastate rural Maine which heats with fuel oil. If you live in a taxpayer-subsidized $280,000 apartment in downtown Portland, well I guess it won’t affect you much.
And you arrived at your ‘stand-by’ statement how? Have you found your $10/gal theory in papers somewhere? Or is it all made up in your mind and you think that makes it a fact?
And I don’t live in a rent subsidized apartment anywhere. Do you live in a cave with all these “facts” swimming around in your brain?
Actually, I have found this theory in the papers somewhere. If you would like to educate yourself, Google “Steven Chu (who is Obama’s energy secretary) 2008 Wall Street Journal interview in which he states that the US needs to get to European gas prices” Prices in Europe were 8 to 10 bucks a gallon then (even higher now) In fairness to him, at a recent hearing he testified that is not the official policy of the Obama administration now, but he specifically refused to renounce his prior statement. Or check out Obama’s own 2008 CNBC interview with John Harwood in which he said that higher energy prices will be good for America. Now, I tend to believe a person’s actions more than his words. Nixing the Keystone XL pipeline, halting all drilling in the gulf long, long after any reasonable period of concern about the BP spill, more drilling regulations than ever in place, etc, etc, etc does not match his “All of the above.” rhetoric. In conclusion of this point, I guess I would say direct statements by Obama and his cronies backed up by years of their actions is why I drew the conclusion that they want 10 buck a gallon gas.
As for my domicile, I do not live in a cave. I live in a fine old New England home, heated primarily by locally sourced renewable wood pellets. But I see many of my neighbors, many of whom are elderly, differently abled, or just plain too poor to heat their homes with alternative fuels and as such freeze during our long Maine winters.
Mr. Obama has cut LIHEAP aid, and the local public housing is filled up mostly with single mothers who I guess got pregnant because white men denied them access to contraceptives, so please ask Ms. McCormick to build a pantload of new ,$280,000 units in downtown Portland, ’cause were coming..
You can speculate all you want. Regs are in place to prevent things like the blowout in the Gulf. Have you ever seen energy extraction? I thank my luck that coal, oil and gas were never found under my 10 acres.
LIGEAP was cut because of arm twisting by Republicans, no other way to put it. A good memory would help you remember the negotiations that the president had with the my way or the highway Tea Party.
The main reason for the gas spike is speculation on Wall Street which congress said they would take care of 4 years ago when(under Bush) it reached over $ 4.00.Don’t think they ‘d be as rash to propose doing that again in an election year when they all want that $$$$ from those on Wall Street and in the oil industry. It’s easy to blame the president , but if a president could affect it, Bush would have done so 4 years ago to help his party get into the White House again.
I see you swallowed the lie whole. This is not about the government paying for contraception, it is about making sure women have equal access to medical care. Nowhere, except in disturbed right wing minds, does it say that the gov’t will be paying.
Also note that the insurance industry itself isn’t siding with the right wingers. They know that contraception is a bargain for them. They would rather pay for contraception than for even an uncomplicated birth.
It also says something about the mentality of the Catholic Church when they don’t object to policies that provide Viagra, etc. but can’t stomach policies that provide for drugs for women’s health.
Finally, get off the idea that this is about somebody looking for a free ride. Contraception pills are provided as part of the coverage for no more money. This is about the Catholic Church aligning itself with right wing politicians in an election year.
One more time
The issue is that of the government forcing religious organizations, like Georgetown University to pay for, directly or indirectly through their insurers, contraceptives, which is anathema to Catholic doctrine.
It is about religious liberty.
It is not about the use of contraceptives for medical reasons,
It is not about restricting women’s access to contraceptives,
It is not about men hating women,
It is not about pedophile priests or a vast cover-up conspiracy
It is not about Rush Limbaugh
One more time.
The Catholic Church does not recognize the difference between the pill for contraception and the other medical uses.
If they want to turn everything they own into religious purposes, fine. But if they are engaging in the commerce of this world, then secular laws apply.
It is all about access to contraception, which is a woman’s right. Funny how the Supreme Court has ruled that women have this right, and Conservatives are all the time trying to restrict it.
The Court has also ruled that the 2nd Amendment is a right, but if somebody tries to restrict gun sales, they cry about that being unconstitutional. So it is constitutional to restrict women’s rights?
It is somewhat related to an organization that hes been shown to commit crimes, lie about it, hide the facts and drag their feet. This is not something in the past, it is going on everyday in Philadelphia during the on going trial there. You mean they have no problem with pedophile clergy but they have a problem with contraception prescriptions? From what I can see, any organization that is acting like the Catholic church has no credibility. Especially when it comes to moral matters.
Lots of individual priests are moral upstanding counselors. But the org. they belong to has some mending to do before they come out with whining about something relatively minor.
That means, before they say that this prevents their free exercise of faith, they need to come clean about the lives they have destroyed in this world.
Guess we are not going to agree on this. You insist on misstating Catholic doctrine , bringing in something about gun ownership rights, Philadelphia mafia pedophile priests, and gosh knows what else, when in fact the fact is this is about a government forcing its will on a religious organization to violate its doctrine.
Well, if the Church’s doctrine is found in the Bible, where? Or is it the interpretation of the Bible by the Catholic curia, all of whom are men of advanced age?
If the Bible made clear that contraception was forbidden or that the Catholic doctrine of life beginning when the egg is implanted in the uterus, then I would understand. But if the doctrine stems from an interpretation from an old human male, then how much accommodation should it be provided.
So far as bringing in the 2nd amendment, it is to prove a point. Gun rights are defended to ridiculousness. Women’s rights are eroded by some of the same people, and the Republicans and the Catholic Church in particular. They are both rights, but one is more worthy? NOT!
“Why should people pay an extra tax to provide contraceptives to a promiscuous female law student?”
And your evidence that the law student is promiscuous is… ?
Just because she testified in favor of providing health insurance coverage for contraceptives doesn’t mean she’s promiscuous. She’s studying to be a lawyer. Lawyers represent people.
Also, birth control pills are used for some diseases, not just for contraception.
Another selective reader. The government is not covering the contraceptives, insurance would be. Just like they already cover Viagara…
How are family planning devices and/or services considered non-essential?
Vasectomies and Viagra benefit men … Birth control is still a woman’s issue.
Limbaugh and his kind are wimps, who try to build themselves up by degrading women. Maybe Limbaugh should put an aspirin between his knees, to prevent him from being kicked in the jewels. Better yet, he should control his mouth, and stop degrading women.
Somehow, I doubt Limbaugh actually possesses “jewels.” And I wonder about his cigar habit. In photos, he seems to be sort of… enjoying… that thing so much.
Dear me, I seem to be turning into a Freudian.
No Liz, you aren’t turning into anything, just showing your ignorance.
You’re an expert on Limbaugh’s sexual apparatus? Enlighten the rest of us–no, wait–DON’T!
Maybe Rush has had a relapse into his prescription drug addiction.
A relapse would imply he had stopped.
Won’t happen.The conservative R’s as a whole hate women and they can’t stand the fact that their days of being on top of the mountain are over.Hispanics will run this country by 2040.We haven’t seen anything yet.
Liberal women need no help from men to degrade themselves.
I do not see an issue with Birth Control being provided to anyone. I find this alternative far better then paying for a child or numerous children these women will produce without the birth control that could prevent it. I also think that it is harsh to say that someone is a slut because she is responsible and taking care of herself. Who is to say she isn’t in a committed relationship and just doesn’t want a baby at the current moment. I can say though that a women’s “reproductive rights” as everyone says are nonexistence…..they don’t exists in the constitution as to date. And that I as a women do not believe that anyone in the world has the right to terminate a life. If there is a heartbeat then it is alive, and I don’t support women having funds to have abortions, but if they want to be RESPONSIBLE then regardless of coverage they need to be on birth control, or be abstinent. You play you pay, and with all the contraceptive in the world you should not be pregnant if you do not want to be.
Many brain-dead people have heartbeats. Are they ‘alive’?
All hail to the GOP/Tea Party conservatives that have made this an issue in the upcoming elections. Thank you, thank you, thank you! As if we didn’t already have enough reasons not to vote for these clowns. What they’re doing here is like driving a two foot long stake right through the center of their own coffins. Now all we liberals have to do is find our shovels to fill the hole they’ve dug so deeply for themselves.
No kidding. Only my base would think that trading the economy (because it might be recovering) for this lunacy was a smart move. Another great move.
Are you Eliot Cutler?
I usually enjoy your writing. I take issue on a couple of points with this piece, however. First, you totally change the subject midway through this article….you go from the contraception issue, to Sen. Snowe leaving….and you don’t really succeed in blending the two. Second, isn’t the real issue concerning contraception, the fact that the government is trying to force religious institutions to go against their core beliefs? Doesn’t that seem like an infringement on our right to separation of government and church? Doesn’t it scare you that the government is trying to expand it’s control? To me, that is the scary stuff!
I don’t believe in war, can I get my money back, please?
You are so easily manipulated by republican panderers and cynical hacks its pitiful.
Is a hospital owned by a religious institute first and foremost a religious institute or a hospital? Lewiston has two hospitals, St Mary’s and CMMC and I’ve used both. When I used St. Mary’s I did so because it was a hospital that provided certain care that I needed. It’s religious affiliation had nothing what-so-ever to do with my reasons for going there.
The idea of businesses being able cherry pick the benefits that it provides scares me. If a church owned business can tell it’s employees that it won’t provide benefits that may be used for what they consider to be immoral purposes where does it end? What is to prevent the owners of a business from saying that it’s immoral to smoke so they’ll no longer pay for coverage of emphysema or lung cancer or asthma because it MIGHT be related to smoking? Given the cost of treating both those conditions there is certainly plenty of financial motivation for a business to do so. And although those conditions certainly are often linked to smoking that isn’t always the case. Do we really want businesses and employers deciding what is moral and what is not?
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to say that those institutions whose primary purpose is religion may limit the coverage they offer as an extension of their religious freedom and those institutions whose primary purpose is not religion must provide a certain minimum standard of care without exemptions for religion since they are not, first and foremost, a religious institution. Let’s leave the moral judgment in the church and out of people’s jobs.
This is why we need health insurance not tied to employers. Employers need to get out of providing health insurance altogether.
You’ve nailed it! Obama created a fire storm with his mandate that threatened religious freedom, and the libs turned it into the false notion that the republicans are anti contraception. The ill informed public buys the lies!
I think part of the reason one church is screaming about religious liberty is because they were forced to turn over documents that revealed the church’s involvement in sex abuse. When the gov’t went through some of the e-mails, one e-mail from an archbishop was found that told his subordinates to destroy evidence about the sex abuse. The case continues, but the church is still resisting releasing records, claiming a religious exemption. Just how many exemptions do you grant religious organizations?
When these ‘religious institutions’ stop taking federal tax dollars they can do whatever they want and people would have to decide if they want to work for them or not. But they DO take our tax dollars and so they must follow the law.
Thank you Renee for thrusting forward your point. We all appreciate the grip of a good story. I only wish that I could be inside the folds of the fullness of your argument. Your womanhood makes my small shaft of argument seem totally inadequate. I feel like a hotdog being thrown down a hallway.
This may all be for nothing when SCOTUS rules against Obama care in June. Then in the November election and gas is $6 dollars a gallon Obama will be gone , then they’ll elect another Rep to the Senate seat and the homosexual marriage act will be defeated due to high turn out of Conservative and Independent voters and we will be at war with Iran.
http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2012/03/sandra-fluke-georgetown-law-women-need-3000-for-birth-control-see-the-real-cost-video-control/
Do you yourself hope to be forced to take “individual respojnsibility” to pay for your own blood transfusion, if your employer decides to strip away that provision in your healthcare package, due to its religious beliefs?
Liz,
I get your posting the same notion over and over about the evil employers.
However, in the real world, if you don’t like working for your employer, LEAVE!
If you’re any good at all, you’ll soon land a job with an employer who treats you like you deserve.
Turnover among employees has increased incredably over the past twenty years with very little loyalty among either employees or employers. However, the truly great employers continue to maintain very stable work forces.
Cianbro’s a pretty good place to work, it’s owned by the employees these days, and offers leading edge Wellness Programs for all.
It’s so easy to quit a job today and go find another one. Uh-huh. Real easy;
I’m one guy who opposes the effort to let moralists interfere with women’s healthcare. This is not about tanf or socialism orgovernment…this ridiculous restriction would also apply to the married mother who believes her family is big enough. No one else is paying for it because she earned her health insurance at her job.
This is all about a group of people who want to interfere with the prescriptions a woman gets from her doctor because they want people to have less sex. Good luck with that!
What’s next? Will they want women to cover themselves so innocent men won’t be tempted to rape them?
Isn’t it obvious that less access to contraception will lead to more abortions?
Why should the taxpayers pay for BC ? Other medical reasons for the pills sure. Not for recreational sex
good lord, this has nothing to do with the tax payers! We’re talking about insurers here.
Should vasectomies be covered?
Because taxpayers are NOT paying for birth control.
These are policies offered by employers to employees who pay for them – out of their hard work – or in this case, through the school they attend.
It is not taxpayer funded – the students pay for these policies themselves.
low-information fail
Please try to keep up.
yessah
And should they pay for viagra as they do now? Recreational sex ok for men?
With a Govt hand out no
Renee Ordway is simply stating how well she fits in as a liberal columnist for the BDN. We also have Dr. Steele advocating national health insurance via the” Affordable Healthcare Act,” which is only affordable if honest, hard-working taxpayers fork over what they legitimately earn, while the welfare masses are talking on the “free” cell phones for which we are also paying, making dates to use their “Free” contraception.
Tell me with a straight face that the CEO of Aetna “legitimately earns” $16 million a year.
I’d guess it’s about as legitimate as Steven King earing $32 Million a year, or any of the bloated salaries of sports figures.
Difference is King and athletes are subject to the popular marketplace.If nobody went to Red Sox games,the salaries would be zero.But from the first time you get your butt slapped as a newborn,you’re part of the insurance cabal.And I’m not defending any outsize salaries.
Stephen King earns money by writing books Sports figures earn salaries because people attend their games (and watch commercials if viewing them on TV).
The CEOs of for-profit insurance corporations “earn” their salaries by 1) charging ridiculously high premiums, 2) doing their best to avoid paying out for legitimate claims, and 3) cherry-picking people they will insure (no one with a pre-existing condition need apply).
I’ll never understand the conservatives. They don’t want women to have abortions. But they don’t want them to have access to birth control either. How strange is that. Why is birth control a problem with these people? Oh, and, Concerned Mainer1, not all women on B.C. are promiscuous. Too bad the conservative base could actually do some campaigning about the real issues…you know, things like the ecomomy, foreign policy, the enviromental issues….makes you wonder.
B/c they have no answers for all of those problems either,having created them so they just put up smokescreens to mislead the ignorant.
It’s so funny that you refer to all women (“look at what we did”) as if they are one mindless agreeable hoard that sees things your way. You realize that nearly half of them don’t agree with you, right?
Daughter uses low dose Yaz for Cystic Acne. It came as a three month supply and cost me $250.
1. Religious employers are just that employers. They should not get any special exemptions due to a religious status.
2. Preventing unwanted pregnancy is cheaper for everyone. What would you rather? Have MaineCare and any other insurance company for that matter pay the $20 for a one month supply of the birth control pill (its not even that high) OR, have the tax payers pay for the hospital bill, the TANF, Section 8, etc etc?
3. Everyone needs to keep in mind that this is not just a medicaid issue but also for private insurers. Also, since the comments are becoming more and more about medicaid/medicare/ObamaCare, look at all the other countries in the world that offer universal health care. Do they seem all that bad?
Renee, stick to writing about something you know. Your readers would be better served if you were to write about cooking or gardening. Your misguided prospective twists the truth and does nothing more than perpetuate lies.
Ah, another misogynist from the peanut gallery. When you look up
that up in the dictionary you might as well look up prospective.
Haha…I will admit to making a typo!
Great column Renee.Minor correction-it is LESLEY Stahl.Thanks again.
Fair and balanced. What are we going to have to pay for spring break so that the law student can have a social life.
Target sells Birth Control pills for 9 dollars a month.
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/02/147820584/weekly-standard-target-sells-pills-for-9-a-month
If Ms. Fluke is spending 1000 a year on birth control while shopping wisely for the pill, she is paying around 74 dollars a month on condoms. I really do not want to buy condoms for college students.
You are not buying any “colleges students” (sic) birth control.
They buy their own health insurance through the school – with their own money.
All they want is no deductible or copay for birth control on their policies.
Please try to keep up.
yessah
The school offers this insurance and negotiates the coverage ,correct? They have a staff that handles insurance issues?These staff members are paid by the University? Students can opt out of these plans if they are covered by their parents insurance, or have a policy of their own? These pills run about $10 a month(cheaper than most co-pay amounts),free if some effort is put into looking,correct? These are pretty smart kids,right?
So what is the real issue here,Bub?
BTW Renee, Friess didn’t say that to Leslie Stahl. He said it to Andrea Mitchell.
Please don’t mistake Rush trying to get ratings with the opinions of the vast majority of Republicans. He’s just looking for attention so he can compete with the Kardashians. The truth is that if a woman can pay for birth control, she should. Everyone shouldn’t get it for free – all of our premiums will go up even more, unnecessarily.
Taxpayers are not paying for anyone’s birth control – their insurance pays for it and they pay for their insurance.
Get it?
Which republicons have condemned Limpbaugh?
none
Their silence says it all.
yessah
Kudos Renee. Right on!
Weak men, who defy the teachings of Jesus, and allow Women to try and share the burden , placed upon man, by God, will weep when they stand before him and discover that his words were to be honored forever. The low morals displayed today in all known media, by these wanton women, is being noted, with horror. We (All men), have failed.
How revealing that Renee praises Olympia for voting against the awful right-wing GOP Blunt Amendment but, instead of criticizing Collins for supporting it, instead immediately praises both Senators for not revealing their mutual dislike of each other. But the Bangor Daily NEVER criticizes Collins and indeed carefully said nothing about his anti-women’s vote. Pathetic. Very disappointing in Renee’s going along with this.