The Conservative Cave

Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: vesta111 on March 13, 2012, 08:46:14 PM

Title: Sandra Fluke
Post by: vesta111 on March 13, 2012, 08:46:14 PM
Lady's, have you checked your benefits on your health insurance??  Any men looking in here checked into yours ??

I did and found that my benefits and Hubby's are the same,  Do we have need for them or use them all??

I get free pap exams if I wish, hubby has no need for them but pays the same price as I do.  I get free breast exams, so does Hubby but little chance he will need them.

Hubby gets free Prostrate exams, no chance I will need them but I still pay the same price as he for the insurance.

All things covered in birthing a baby for me, Hubby cannot get pregnant but he still pays the same as I do for insurance that he will never need. 

Hubby can get a free vasectomy, I can get free removal of the uterus,  --I and he both pay for insurance and the covered medical care if we need it or not. 

Viagra is covered, I do not need it as a woman but so is male hormone shots I do not need.   Hubby does not need Estrogen replacement but that is covered in what he pays for insurance.

So what is the big deal with Birth control pills that for any reason may be needed, sure men have no need, but woman have no need for Prostate exams either yet we all pay for the  benefit to the treatment .

It is the Insurance provider that controls the benefits not the work place. All depends on what Insurance company the work place want to go with and what they can afford.

Off workmans insurance, then one has to decide how and what insurance company they wish to go with. Very Expensive for anyone not covered with a work place.

 There are many places, free clinics that dispence BC to any woman that want them.  This is America, need BC with no money, there are hundreds of thousands of woman's clinics that give them out free.

Just because the benefits in a health insurance policy are things ones that we cannot use because of our sex yet we pay for does not mean we have to use them.    So they put BC in an insurance policy and one does not want or cannot use the benefit due to sex, age or religious belief, that is up to us to decide what benefit we need and not to tell others they cannot if they wish to use the benefit as they see fit. 

 Shit some insurance covers Abortion, and the cost is the same for the insurance for both male and female. 

Smoke and mirrors here, this woman has been in the classroom for too many years and needs to get into real life and stop her work with woman that are victims because of HELP ,never taught how to control their own lives.
Just give them a pill, send them on their way and see them 3 months later.

America where a 12 year old can go to a school nurse and get BC, or arrange an abortion without their parents knowledge.   Outrageous and unacceptable in civilised society.


Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Evil_Conservative on March 13, 2012, 09:33:35 PM
She's a slut.

Next....
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Chris_ on March 13, 2012, 09:36:39 PM
(http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff68/kayaktn/432233_10151382190240494_195530355493_23337663_154747612_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Evil_Conservative on March 13, 2012, 09:54:33 PM
(http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff68/kayaktn/432233_10151382190240494_195530355493_23337663_154747612_n.jpg)

:rotf:

I shared that on Facebook too.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: thundley4 on March 13, 2012, 09:55:15 PM
:rotf:

I shared that on Facebook too.

Same here.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Ballygrl on March 13, 2012, 11:04:27 PM
(http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj140/RepublicanandProud/liberallogic.jpg)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: seahorse513 on March 13, 2012, 11:46:43 PM
Well Flukeydouche can have all the sex, she wants, I still ain't paying for her damn birth control..
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: obumazombie on March 14, 2012, 12:45:34 AM
Ballygrl, can you somehow integrate this Fluke issue into your 9/9/9 plan ?
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Wineslob on March 14, 2012, 12:28:32 PM
I'm trying to figure out why she needs condoms on dildos.     :???:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: JohnnyReb on March 14, 2012, 01:00:50 PM
I'm trying to figure out why she needs condoms on dildos.     :???:

Save soap and water, maybe? There are some places even a dildo won't go?

Hell, don't ask me, I don't use 'em.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 14, 2012, 01:08:41 PM
(http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff68/kayaktn/432233_10151382190240494_195530355493_23337663_154747612_n.jpg)

 :rotf: :rotf:

Hi5
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Ballygrl on March 14, 2012, 06:43:39 PM
Ballygrl, can you somehow integrate this Fluke issue into your 9/9/9 plan ?

Umm, how? LOL
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: obumazombie on March 14, 2012, 06:47:20 PM
Umm, how? LOL
Well, how about 9condoms/9hours/9dollars
Or, 9.99 gas with 9condoms/9sponges/9bcp's thrown in for every gallon you buy. I'm just spitballing, but surely, Fluke is tailor made to get in on the 9/9/9 plan somehow or another, don't you think ?
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Duke Nukum on March 14, 2012, 07:37:38 PM
Umm, how? LOL
A 69-69-69 plan?
Plan 69 From Outer Space (if that one isn't taken already, I'm going into the lame-pr0n movie biz).
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 14, 2012, 07:55:11 PM



So what is the big deal with Birth control pills that for any reason may be needed, sure men have no need, but woman have no need for Prostate exams either yet we all pay for the  benefit to the treatment .

It is the Insurance provider that controls the benefits not the work place. All depends on what Insurance company the work place want to go with and what they can afford.

...

 There are many places, free clinics that dispence BC to any woman that want them.  This is America, need BC with no money, there are hundreds of thousands of woman's clinics that give them out free.



There are many places to get birth control pills, condoms and other services for free, so why does an insurance provider need to cover this one particular medication with no co-pay? 

Why does an insurance provider also have to provide pills that abort babies, even provide them with no co-pay?

Vesta, my hospital is a Catholic hospital that self-insures.  We don't pay any insurance provider, the employees and hospital system pay into a pool that is used to cover health expenses for all of us.  Why do we have to give up our right to refuse to pay for drugs that abort babies?  Why do I, personally, have to buy health coverage as ordered by ObamaCare that directly provides free pills to murder children? 
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: thundley4 on March 14, 2012, 08:09:38 PM
There are many places to get birth control pills, condoms and other services for free, so why does an insurance provider need to cover this one particular medication with no co-pay? 

Why does an insurance provider also have to provide pills that abort babies, even provide them with no co-pay?

Vesta, my hospital is a Catholic hospital that self-insures.  We don't pay any insurance provider, the employees and hospital system pay into a pool that is used to cover health expenses for all of us.  Why do we have to give up our right to refuse to pay for drugs that abort babies?  Why do I, personally, have to buy health coverage as ordered by ObamaCare that directly provides free pills to murder children? 

This whole thing is a DemonRat plan to cause problems between the GOP and women voters.  Why choose birth control?  Why not choose heart medicines or cancer drugs?  There are drugs that are literally life and death for those that need them, yet the left chose those dealing with birth control to champion for getting for free.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Ballygrl on March 14, 2012, 08:14:53 PM
OK, I'll play around with it a bit and see what I can come up with.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Rugnuts on March 14, 2012, 08:16:29 PM
This whole thing is a DemonRat plan to cause problems between the GOP and women voters.  Why choose birth control?  Why not choose heart medicines or cancer drugs?  There are drugs that are literally life and death for those that need them, yet the left chose those dealing with birth control to champion for getting for free.
thats how i end discussions that come up about all this BC stuff in the news.

and i heard my wife use the "well wine is good for the heart so i want my health plan to cover a bottle a week with no copay" on the phone the other day, lol
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Evil_Conservative on March 14, 2012, 10:15:46 PM
thats how i end discussions that come up about all this BC stuff in the news.

and i heard my wife use the "well wine is good for the heart so i want my health plan to cover a bottle a week with no copay" on the phone the other day, lol

She's good.  We should head over to DC and demand this happen.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Celtic Rose on March 14, 2012, 10:19:47 PM
She's good.  We should head over to DC and demand this happen.

I can absolutely get behind this one!  :cheersmate:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: BlueStateSaint on March 15, 2012, 04:17:27 AM
OK, I'll play around with it a bit and see what I can come up with.

How 'bout this . . .

9 strokes a minute for 9 minutes, 9 times a day.  BC used up. :tongue: :fuelfire:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: vesta111 on March 15, 2012, 08:56:07 AM
There are many places to get birth control pills, condoms and other services for free, so why does an insurance provider need to cover this one particular medication with no co-pay? 

Why does an insurance provider also have to provide pills that abort babies, even provide them with no co-pay?

Vesta, my hospital is a Catholic hospital that self-insures.  We don't pay any insurance provider, the employees and hospital system pay into a pool that is used to cover health expenses for all of us.  Why do we have to give up our right to refuse to pay for drugs that abort babies?  Why do I, personally, have to buy health coverage as ordered by ObamaCare that directly provides free pills to murder children? 

Very sad that I have to pay for the old geezers that cannot get it up to have sex with Viagra, no co- pay, but a female who was mugged and raped has to pay for a pill that will prevent a pregnancy that is ended with an abortion that I also have to pay for. 

Abortion is such a horrid thing in any situation, be it a consenting sex affair, rape or incest.  The woman bears the brunt of horror and the male walks away feeling relieved of any physical, mental responsibility Or financial worry

Silver tongued young males will say and do anything to get into the pants of a love struck girlfriend.  Hormones and lust come up here, the male in lust, the female in what she thinks is love.-----------Song in the 1950's said it right on ----Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?-----

  This is not abortion as long as a pregnancy never occurred. To stop a pregnancy before it happens is on the shoulders of the woman while the men get drugs to enable them to keep having sex.

 Pregnancy due to incest and rape is very common, always has been, it is not just the sexually active woman that get nailed by a male. So we pay for men to be able to in pregnant females but have no protection for the woman they impregnant??

Woman and girls do not run about looking to get pregnant, men do not run around looking to in pregnant females.   Males are just looking to have fun with no after consequences, woman are looking for LOVE.

So the females just looking for fun are SLUTS and the males are just doing what males do ??????

Why is it Normal for males to seek out sex but an aberration for woman to do so also.??

We are not that far from the old rules and thoughts that woman are a temption to men that are to week to resist them.
We females are the daughters of EVE that brought about the down fall of Man.

Bull, just an excuse to inslave females through the century's.   Woman are as human as men, need and want sex,  but, we pay a price for sex that no man does and with modern drugs the men are able to have more sex then ever.

Give me a break, we now have the technology to prevent pregnancy before it even starts, does this make the females sluts ,  Hell no, just makes them human as the males that will stick their thing in a goat or camel.









Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 15, 2012, 09:10:46 AM
Now Ms. Fluke is saying that she wants the government to provide contraception for others and not her. She claims that she is looking out for the poor and needing who can not afford it.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: JohnnyReb on March 15, 2012, 09:12:00 AM
Liberal/DUmmie wymins have a nein, nein, nein plan.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: BlueStateSaint on March 15, 2012, 09:48:55 AM
Liberal/DUmmie wymins have a nein, nein, nein plan.

I don't think conservative men have anything to worry about . . .  :fuelfire: :whistling:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Karin on March 15, 2012, 10:10:17 AM
Quote
that she is looking out for the poor and needing who can not afford it.
  That's what Title X is for.  Enough of the free shit!  (although I can get behind the bottle of good red wine a week at no copay). 
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: BlueStateSaint on March 15, 2012, 10:47:25 AM
(although I can get behind the bottle of good red wine a week at no copay)

I stopped drinking, yet I'll be able to get one a week . . . Who's gonna pony up what for that?  To the highest (best) bidder!   :tongue: :fuelfire: :-)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Airwolf on March 15, 2012, 11:16:39 AM
Now Ms. Fluke is saying that she wants the government to provide contraception for others and not her. She claims that she is looking out for the poor and needing who can not afford it.

Sorry but no one is obligated to pay for hers or anyone else's BC. Go buy it or stop doing it yourselves asshats.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: vesta111 on March 15, 2012, 11:42:58 AM
I don't think conservative men have anything to worry about . . .  :fuelfire: :whistling:

Some of the Horniest' goats I ever knew were married Conservatives that prayed on the young girls that came to work for them.  These good Church going family men, well known in the community, married with family were above reproach, then were when outed,  cried tears that no man was perfect and that they were forgiven by Jesus.

Amazing the length's these Good men of God will go to.    Up here we had a Church where the Pastor and some of the deacons were using a young girl for sex.    GETS MUCH WORSE

Poor kid, she tried everything she as a young girl knew to stop this but family would not listen to her " nonsense" and finally the police became involved.  

GETS WORSE-----Her family and the Pastor and the deacons forced her to stand up in the church and claim before the congregation she was at fault, a bad person to have led these man astray.   She at 15 was a Jezebel that forced the good men of God to sin.

Talk about child abuse, arrrrrg.   The good men of God, the Pastor of and the Deacons are now in prison for a few years, they will get out soon and go on their way.    What about the Girl, how can she ever trust anyone again, can she ever be able to walk into a Church and trust the Pastors or Deacons again, has she lost GOD due to this ???

This is my problem, the number of people that loose God due to the actions of those that have influence over them.

Those abused by the so called messengers of God, the usually men that seem to have a connection to God that woman do not have by their teachings.   Or the young boys that are under a man of god that needs a BJ from them.

The numbers of family's that go to church in any faith are going down, except for the televangelists that sneak into the homes of the aged. Send us your money and you will be united in heaven with your family forever.

Just one man of faith did I ever trust, a Hawian who held a degree in Theology and had a 35 person congregation in Hawaii.   Smart man, poor man, he was not with a college degree out to make money.  In a Quonset hut he and his Deacons baptised my youngest son, there were holes in the roof and sides of the Church, but it was better then a baptism in a huge Church some where else.

Congregational  as I was raised in but with a twist from the Yankee churches.

Deacon's dressed in lais passed my baby about one to another each murming a pray, child came to the Peacher that did the baptism, and the congregation broke into a  Hawaiian song to bless him.   Damest thing I ever saw.  Most likely will see again.

Religion is important to me, when I find it defiled, rotten from the bottom up, then I speak out.


 
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 15, 2012, 12:16:12 PM
Sorry but no one is obligated to pay for hers or anyone else's BC. Go buy it or stop doing it yourselves asshats.

It is all about entitlement. Some just feel that they are entitled to everything.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: CG6468 on March 15, 2012, 12:39:04 PM
She's had her 15 minutes of fame. Rush should have never apologized. She is a liberal, political slut.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 15, 2012, 07:46:21 PM
Very sad that I have to pay for the old geezers that cannot get it up to have sex with Viagra, no co- pay, but a female who was mugged and raped has to pay for a pill that will prevent a pregnancy that is ended with an abortion that I also have to pay for. 

Abortion is such a horrid thing in any situation, be it a consenting sex affair, rape or incest.  The woman bears the brunt of horror and the male walks away feeling relieved of any physical, mental responsibility Or financial worry

Silver tongued young males will say and do anything to get into the pants of a love struck girlfriend.  Hormones and lust come up here, the male in lust, the female in what she thinks is love.-----------Song in the 1950's said it right on ----Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?-----

  This is not abortion as long as a pregnancy never occurred. To stop a pregnancy before it happens is on the shoulders of the woman while the men get drugs to enable them to keep having sex.

 Pregnancy due to incest and rape is very common, always has been, it is not just the sexually active woman that get nailed by a male. So we pay for men to be able to in pregnant females but have no protection for the woman they impregnant??

Woman and girls do not run about looking to get pregnant, men do not run around looking to in pregnant females.   Males are just looking to have fun with no after consequences, woman are looking for LOVE.

So the females just looking for fun are SLUTS and the males are just doing what males do ??????

Why is it Normal for males to seek out sex but an aberration for woman to do so also.??

We are not that far from the old rules and thoughts that woman are a temption to men that are to week to resist them.
We females are the daughters of EVE that brought about the down fall of Man.

Bull, just an excuse to inslave females through the century's.   Woman are as human as men, need and want sex,  but, we pay a price for sex that no man does and with modern drugs the men are able to have more sex then ever.

Give me a break, we now have the technology to prevent pregnancy before it even starts, does this make the females sluts ,  Hell no, just makes them human as the males that will stick their thing in a goat or camel.











Point 1) in today's world, the woman holds all the power when it comes to bearing or aborting a child.  If she chooses to keep it, the man is on the hook for the next 18 - 21 years, paying child support, health insurance, 1/2 of all co-pays and uncovered medical, travel expenses to see his child, and even college costs in many states.  He has no legal say in whether his child lives or dies.  If he wants the child, she can still kill it.

Point 2) The regulations in Obamacare require all insurances to cover pills that abort the child.  They require all Christians to directly pay for the murder of innocent children.  It's horrific that our country kills over a million babies every year already, how many more will we murder when the pill to abort is "FREE??"
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: obumazombie on March 15, 2012, 09:11:24 PM
By "FREE" we mean a maker pays for it.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: vesta111 on March 16, 2012, 09:31:06 AM
Point 1) in today's world, the woman holds all the power when it comes to bearing or aborting a child.  If she chooses to keep it, the man is on the hook for the next 18 - 21 years, paying child support, health insurance, 1/2 of all co-pays and uncovered medical, travel expenses to see his child, and even college costs in many states.  He has no legal say in whether his child lives or dies.  If he wants the child, she can still kill it.

Point 2) The regulations in Obamacare require all insurances to cover pills that abort the child.  They require all Christians to directly pay for the murder of innocent children.  It's horrific that our country kills over a million babies every year already, how many more will we murder when the pill to abort is "FREE??"

How can one kill something that never existed in the first place ??  Medication stops the ability to reproduce or even start a human life.    Are we saying a male that uses contreception rubbers is guilty of something ??? By spilling his seed on the ground and not inpregerating a woman he has sinned?  All men that masterbate take heed you are sinning against the laws of GOD.

What to do with people that for medical reasons cannot conceive .    Is it ,sex, a sin for them as they know there will be no reproduction from the act??

To abort means to stop something active to stop, such as to put the breaks on a car to stop movement or for a space shuttle to be aborted at count down due to weather or mechanical problems. To abort anything means to stop a on going action down.

If there is not yet an action, then one cannot abort it.   No problem if the action was prevented in the first place.

Sort of like no one can fire a gun that has no projectiles in it.    

Sex is a hunger for all animals including humans, does not matter if the results are to bring forth more of their kind.

Both men and woman have the responsibility to know their limits, feed and cloth their children educate them, to deny BC to those that have maxed out their resources is to deny them the choice of how to care for new children or place them into a no-sex marriage.

Before now woman had little choice then to stop having sex with their husbands when their body's were wearing out from too many pregnancy's.     So Husbands took mistresses for sex and the wives were trilled, they could add another 10-15 years of their lives and raise their kids and the mistresses came and went.  

People do find love after 50 years or so, they marry with little chance of reproducing, Natures Way, they do have a lusty sex life free from worry about pregnancy. What is the difference in having sex at 60 with no worry and having sex at 18 years old with no worry ???

One is natural ageing, the other is by taking advantage of products man made that God gave us the brains to invent.

To stop the act of life of a child is murder, the mothers have the burden of knowing all their lives they killed their own child.

To escape this horror, woman take a pill that prevents anything from getting started.  Anyone take a multi vitamin to stop disease from growing in their body ???    If there is something like Limes to prevent scurvy from happening, or aspirin to keep the heart healthy, ----- these are not abortion actions any more then the pill is.

One cannot kill something that is not alive or there.  



Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Eupher on March 16, 2012, 09:40:31 AM
 :epicfacepalm:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Rebel on March 16, 2012, 09:41:28 AM
How can one kill something that never existed in the first place ??  Medication stops the ability to reproduce or even start a human life.    Are we saying a male that uses contreception rubbers is guilty of something ??? By spilling his seed on the ground and not inpregerating a woman he has sinned?  All men that masterbate take heed you are sinning against the laws of GOD.

Talk about your all-time stupid analogies.


This isn't about medication to stop impregnation. It's about aborting a child. No one is against condoms, birth control pills, the sponge, or anything like that, save maybe the turbo Santorum. Just damn, Vesta.  :whatever:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: obumazombie on March 16, 2012, 11:37:57 AM
Talk about your all-time stupid analogies.


This isn't about medication to stop impregnation. It's about aborting a child. No one is against condoms, birth control pills, the sponge, or anything like that, save maybe the turbo Santorum. Just damn, Vesta.  :whatever:
The Catholic church has long held that artificial contraception is contrary to God's will. Santorum as a good Catholic would be obedient to such a teaching.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 11:46:52 AM
The more I look at Ms. Fluke, the uglier I think she is.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: obumazombie on March 16, 2012, 11:48:33 AM
The more I look at Ms. Fluke, the uglier I think she is.
Natural birth control. Who says God doesn't try to help us out ?
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 11:49:45 AM
Natural birth control. Who says God doesn't try to help us out ?

That is true. He helps out in many ways.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: CG6468 on March 16, 2012, 02:16:35 PM
The more I look at Ms. Fluke, the uglier I think she is.

That's a big 10-4! She was never attractive to begin with.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: docstew on March 16, 2012, 05:05:43 PM
The Catholic church has long held that artificial contraception is contrary to God's will. Santorum as a good Catholic would be obedient to such a teaching.

It's one thing to be obedient to Church teachings, another to attempt to impose your religious views on the public at large.

We constantly talk about people having rights. You have freedom of speech, but not the right to be heard. You have the right to bear arms, but not necessarily to use them at will. You have the right of association, but not the right to join any group you want. Santorum has his right to be Catholic. He does not have a right to make everyone go to Mass, or eat fish on Friday, or any other of the Catholic teachings.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: rich_t on March 16, 2012, 05:18:23 PM
It's one thing to be obedient to Church teachings, another to attempt to impose your religious views on the public at large.

We constantly talk about people having rights. You have freedom of speech, but not the right to be heard. You have the right to bear arms, but not necessarily to use them at will. You have the right of association, but not the right to join any group you want. Santorum has his right to be Catholic. He does not have a right to make everyone go to Mass, or eat fish on Friday, or any other of the Catholic teachings.

I agree with everything but the bolded section.

Could you clarify that point a bit?

If you mean things like girls shouldn't be allowed to join the boy scouts then I agree.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 16, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
It's one thing to be obedient to Church teachings, another to attempt to impose your religious views on the public at large.

We constantly talk about people having rights. You have freedom of speech, but not the right to be heard. You have the right to bear arms, but not necessarily to use them at will. You have the right of association, but not the right to join any group you want. Santorum has his right to be Catholic. He does not have a right to make everyone go to Mass, or eat fish on Friday, or any other of the Catholic teachings.
Catholic employers have the right to not cover medications or procedures that violate their faith.  My Catholic hospital has the right to refuse to cover birth control pills, sterilization, and abortion.  Everyone has the right to use those services, but they don't have the right to require someone else to violate their conscience by paying for them.  Someone that wants "free" birth control can work for a non-Catholic employer.  Someone that wants access to "free" abortifacients can work for a non-Christian employer.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 16, 2012, 06:31:14 PM
How can one kill something that never existed in the first place ??  
Vesta, one of the requirements of the Obama mandate are free medications that abort the child.  The child does exist, has been conceived, is living and growing and then Mom takes a pill that causes that child to be rejected by the womb.  OK?  Get it?  It's not about stopping pregnancy before it happens.  It's about stopping pregnancy after it starts.  :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright:


Catholic employers do have the right to refuse to cover medications and sterilization procedures that violate their consciences, but the biggest problem for all Christian employers and employees is the requirement to cover medications that kill a living child.  Please tell me you actually get it this time!!   ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 08:34:32 PM
After some thinking and looking at Ms. Flukes picture again. I would hit it, after a case of beer or two  :rotf:
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 08:35:37 PM
Vesta, one of the requirements of the Obama mandate are free medications that abort the child.  The child does exist, has been conceived, is living and growing and then Mom takes a pill that causes that child to be rejected by the womb.  OK?  Get it?  It's not about stopping pregnancy before it happens.  It's about stopping pregnancy after it starts.  :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright: :thatsright:


Catholic employers do have the right to refuse to cover medications and sterilization procedures that violate their consciences, but the biggest problem for all Christian employers and employees is the requirement to cover medications that kill a living child.  Please tell me you actually get it this time!!   ::) ::) ::)

HI5. Life begins at conception.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Chris_ on March 16, 2012, 08:36:49 PM
After some thinking and looking at Ms. Flukes picture again. I would hit it, after a case of beer or two  :rotf:
A hardcore liberal feminist bitch that wants to take down a Jesuit university to satisfy her desire for more dead children?

I'd sooner slap her with a tire iron.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 08:38:12 PM
A hardcore liberal feminist bitch that wants to take down a Jesuit university to satisfy her desire for more dead children?

I'd sooner slap her with a tire iron.

Notice I said after I drank a case or two of beer. I was trying to be funny :)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Chris_ on March 16, 2012, 08:38:41 PM
Gotcha.  But this girl pisses me off.  Talk about greedy.. she gets a free ride to the place, now she wants to bully them into paying for abortion.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Kyle Ricky on March 16, 2012, 08:47:25 PM
Gotcha.  But this girl pisses me off.  Talk about greedy.. she gets a free ride to the place, now she wants to bully them into paying for abortion.

I agree with you. She is a nutcase who has a major entitlement complex.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: Rebel on March 16, 2012, 08:50:40 PM
Catholic employers have the right to not cover medications or procedures that violate their faith.  My Catholic hospital has the right to refuse to cover birth control pills, sterilization, and abortion.  Everyone has the right to use those services, but they don't have the right to require someone else to violate their conscience by paying for them.  Someone that wants "free" birth control can work for a non-Catholic employer.  Someone that wants access to "free" abortifacients can work for a non-Christian employer.

Doc isn't saying Catholic churches should be forced to do anything. Quite the opposite.
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 17, 2012, 04:02:32 AM
Doc isn't saying Catholic churches should be forced to do anything. Quite the opposite.
Then I'm agreeing with him.   :-)
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: vesta111 on March 17, 2012, 08:27:18 AM
Then I'm agreeing with him.   :-)

Mrs Smith, I know of no pill that can abort a child once the egg is fertilizes.  As I have stated over and over again I am a rabid anti abortionest unless a woman has a tubular pregnancy and both child and mother will die if not  tended to  

 Some believe rape or incest is an OK to Abort,  why is that fine to kill innocent baby's, strange that a love child will get the same treatment a unwanted child will get.

Times change, we find ourselves complaining about all the baby's born to the poor, then complain that Abortion is legal, then get upset that the BC would have prevented all this to start in the first place.  Cast aspersions on those that with no access to BC or who do not use it have 15 children.  So what is a woman to do, stop having sex and loose the husbands to seek sex outside the marriage ????

I tell you MrsSmith woman to woman, One of the few times I lost it and insulted a person to their face was when a friend in common only 30 years old with 3 kids was being discussed as her husband had left her.  This woman with no children came out with the fact the friend was catholic and wanted nor could afford more children.

This Harpy came out with a -What do you expect, it is her fault, her husband was getting nothing at home. She with a smug look on her face, I broke a rule against telling on others and asked why her husband was Fooling around on her.    

Please explain to me Mrs Smith why your Hospital will not sterilise a 44 year old woman with 7 children in 9 years with a few miscarriages in there, in poor health??  

 Hubby's mother died at 44 from a massive heart attack, this gets personal. Her parish priest was against her being sterilised.    AS my sis in law told me, ---Daddy was always all over that poor woman, she worked two jobs, came home to feed all the kids and lived in fear of another pregnancy. None of us kids had but a year or so of bonding with Mom, new baby pushed us all to the back.  We, she told me, ate out of cans of food except for the holidays when grandparents and the Aunties came to visit. Then the Irish, Italian cooking came out and fresh vegetables and and fresh meat sent aromas about the house.   But still Mother with no way to controll pregnancy still had to die at an early age.------After her death leaving three teenagers, the father died just 3 months later due to stress and heart break.    

 Why will your hospital not treat a woman with a tubular pregnancy, remove diseased ovary's from a woman, remove cancerous testicles from a man????   Do they remove the prostrate from a man when his life is at stake ???

So much is at odds here other then some hooker getting a D&C every 6 months to taking BC pills to prevent pregnancy.  More then kids experiencing with their sexuality, future life is at stake here.  

This is in no way a black and white question, this is a maze of twists and turns that happen to those that least expect it.

Next time someone bitches about all the people with too many children drain the welfare system, ask why this is so.

Face it, if a female became pregnant every time they had sex with or without consent, no protection to stop the life from beginning, or the males that impregnated every woman they had sex with even just once------Chaos,.

The Dear Lord gave us brains and expect us to use them, the Lord of the Old or New Testament does not expect us to live under a life style of thousands ago.  Hippocrates to say the Muslims are living thousands ago when we in some cases are doing so.

To prevent something from happening is akin to placing alarms in the house to prevent a home invasion.   A woman's womb is the same, to prevent unwanted or unexpected alien invasion that can cause great harm to the woman and or child, is absurd.   We have the methods to stop the invaders, to lock them out.  Keep away anything from invading our body's or homes, no one gets harmed as nothing exists to harm.

If our Lord God did not want people to use their brains he gave us to to protect ourselves from all these problems, then he would not have allowed us to use our brains to advance and find a way to solve our problems in this age, and time.    

BC is a deterrent to stop an action that before it happens.   Same as a flu shot or vaccinations, they stop an action before it begins.

Last hospital I would want to go to with no choice is one that refused to abort me from a tubercular pregnancy.

 





Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: docstew on March 17, 2012, 08:56:23 AM
I agree with everything but the bolded section.

Could you clarify that point a bit?

If you mean things like girls shouldn't be allowed to join the boy scouts then I agree.

Yes. I meant that you can join a group if they concurrently decide to accept you as a member.

Catholic employers have the right to not cover medications or procedures that violate their faith.  My Catholic hospital has the right to refuse to cover birth control pills, sterilization, and abortion.  Everyone has the right to use those services, but they don't have the right to require someone else to violate their conscience by paying for them.  Someone that wants "free" birth control can work for a non-Catholic employer.  Someone that wants access to "free" abortifacients can work for a non-Christian employer.

My position during this whole fiasco has been that if the Catholic Church is required to pay for contraception and abortifacient meds, then any mosque throughout the nation should be required to buy bacon.

Heard an interesting point on Rush yesterday. Anti-smoking programs along with rising taxes on tobacco products are affecting behaviors in CA, specifically, the rate of smokers in that state is falling faster than expected. This is causing problems for CA coffers since they are experiencing reduced tax revenues that fund child development programs. If the USSC finds that the gov't has the power to force you to buy something from a third party, when would we be expected to be forced to buy cigarettes, whether we smoke or not?
Title: Re: Sandra Fluke
Post by: MrsSmith on March 17, 2012, 10:52:05 AM
Mrs Smith, I know of no pill that can abort a child once the egg is fertilizes.  

RU-486: Common name for mifepristone, a drug used in the first several weeks of pregnancy for inducing abortion. RU-486 blocks the receptors for progesterone, a hormone necessary for the maintenance of pregnancy. The drug causes the breakdown of the uterine lining, which, along with the embryo, is shed through the vagina. It has been available in France for the termination of early pregnancy since 1988 and was approved for use in the U.S. in 2000.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/ru-486#ixzz1pOBHe8wi
As I have stated over and over again I am a rabid anti abortionest unless a woman has a tubular pregnancy and both child and mother will die if not  tended to  

 Some believe rape or incest is an OK to Abort,  why is that fine to kill innocent baby's, strange that a love child will get the same treatment a unwanted child will get.

Times change, we find ourselves complaining about all the baby's born to the poor, then complain that Abortion is legal, then get upset that the BC would have prevented all this to start in the first place.  Cast aspersions on those that with no access to BC or who do not use it have 15 children.  So what is a woman to do, stop having sex and loose the husbands to seek sex outside the marriage ????

I tell you MrsSmith woman to woman, One of the few times I lost it and insulted a person to their face was when a friend in common only 30 years old with 3 kids was being discussed as her husband had left her.  This woman with no children came out with the fact the friend was catholic and wanted nor could afford more children.

This Harpy came out with a -What do you expect, it is her fault, her husband was getting nothing at home. She with a smug look on her face, I broke a rule against telling on others and asked why her husband was Fooling around on her.    

Please explain to me Mrs Smith why your Hospital will not sterilise a 44 year old woman with 7 children in 9 years with a few miscarriages in there, in poor health??  

Catholics do not believe in birth control, sterilization or other artificial ways to reduce the number of children God gives.  Those that wish to be sterilized can certainly do so at the local surgical clinic, but our insurance won't pay for it.  Are you really insisting that the Catholic religious beliefs protected under the First Amendment should be sacrificed to the demands of a sex-crazed culture?  With all the methods to control conception and all the places people can go for assistance, we really need to demand that Catholic-owned businesses must also provide these things at no cost, and also provide the medications that murder children?  Any of our employees that wish to be sterilized or murder a child can do so, but there is no reason why my hospital should be forced to provide those things, or that I should be forced to pay for them.

Hubby's mother died at 44 from a massive heart attack, this gets personal. Her parish priest was against her being sterilised.    AS my sis in law told me, ---Daddy was always all over that poor woman, she worked two jobs, came home to feed all the kids and lived in fear of another pregnancy. None of us kids had but a year or so of bonding with Mom, new baby pushed us all to the back.  We, she told me, ate out of cans of food except for the holidays when grandparents and the Aunties came to visit. Then the Irish, Italian cooking came out and fresh vegetables and and fresh meat sent aromas about the house.   But still Mother with no way to controll pregnancy still had to die at an early age.------After her death leaving three teenagers, the father died just 3 months later due to stress and heart break.    

 Why will your hospital not treat a woman with a tubular pregnancy, remove diseased ovary's from a woman, remove cancerous testicles from a man????   Do they remove the prostrate from a man when his life is at stake ???
Don't be an idiot.  No Catholic hospital refuses a service that saves the patient's life.  What they refuse is a service that murders a child for any reason except to save the mother's life.  If Mom isn't going to die, what reason is there to murder the healthy child??

So much is at odds here other then some hooker getting a D&C every 6 months to taking BC pills to prevent pregnancy.  More then kids experiencing with their sexuality, future life is at stake here.  

This is in no way a black and white question, this is a maze of twists and turns that happen to those that least expect it.

Next time someone bitches about all the people with too many children drain the welfare system, ask why this is so.

Face it, if a female became pregnant every time they had sex with or without consent, no protection to stop the life from beginning, or the males that impregnated every woman they had sex with even just once------Chaos,.

The Dear Lord gave us brains and expect us to use them, the Lord of the Old or New Testament does not expect us to live under a life style of thousands ago.  Hippocrates to say the Muslims are living thousands ago when we in some cases are doing so.

To prevent something from happening is akin to placing alarms in the house to prevent a home invasion.   A woman's womb is the same, to prevent unwanted or unexpected alien invasion that can cause great harm to the woman and or child, is absurd.   We have the methods to stop the invaders, to lock them out.  Keep away anything from invading our body's or homes, no one gets harmed as nothing exists to harm.

If our Lord God did not want people to use their brains he gave us to to protect ourselves from all these problems, then he would not have allowed us to use our brains to advance and find a way to solve our problems in this age, and time.    

BC is a deterrent to stop an action that before it happens.   Same as a flu shot or vaccinations, they stop an action before it begins.

Last hospital I would want to go to with no choice is one that refused to abort me from a tubercular pregnancy.
As none of those exist, I don't think you need to panic.   :thatsright:   ::) ::)