Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Incorrect, she specifically talked about her contraception costs while attending law school. Furthermore, she was not appearing before Congress to have the insurance companies pay for her contraception, she was demanding that taxpayers should cover the expense and insurance companies should provide her with contraception for free, without a co-pay. As the Dictator-In-Chief previously directed.
Rush Limbaugh was correct in every detail. Her own public testimony demonstrates that she is indeed a prostitute and a sl*t.
Provide a link that shows she said "taxpayers should cover the expense". ASAP, please.
The minute she volunteered to go to congress to open her mouth was the minute she put her private life at risk, right or wrong. Personally, I don't think she's a prostitute. She COULD be a s**t but that is her business and even if she is one, nobody has proof. Yet.
Where did I say or agree with Limbaugh that she was a s**t or a prostitute? Show me where.
I am merely pointing out the PHONY outrage you and your ilk show everytime a left-winger has some sob story about something they deem unfair. If a left-wing pundit called her a s**t, this wouldn't be an issue because it certainly wasn't an issue when Laura Ingraham was called one.
Still haven't read her testimony, huh? She was prevented from speaking in front of the 5 man panel, so the Democrats kindly gave her an informal
opportunity. She spoke as a private citizen, not as a representative of any official entity. Her appearance would have been a blip in the news cycle if Limbaugh hadn't defamed and attacked her for 3 full days. In short, Limbaugh caused this shameful incident, all by himself. He did not know Sandra Fluke, yet made vile accusations against her repeatedly. It's
highly unlikely that a woman intelligent enough to be a 3rd year law student is a prostitute, but Rush has put himself in a position to have to
prove otherwise. She's likely far too busy to be a sl*t, and I've no doubt that Limbaugh dittoheads are scouring D.C. to find someone that she's
slept with. Unlike Fluke, Laura Ingraham makes her living by being a public figure, which means that her life and morals are open to scrutiny. That is a very different thing than being a private citizen who simply gives testimony in a limited setting. I dislike Bill Maher and would never condone his misogyny, which is the same as Limbaugh's. I don't watch his show for that reason. Nor did I accuse you of saying that she fits either of those descriptions, only that two posters who'd had no trouble using those terms to malign her beat a hasty retreat from the thread when asked to give some corroborating evidence from her testimony because they hadn't read it. It's obvious that you hadn't either, or your first question would not have been one referring to her and her physician. It should be clear at this point that millions of people were outraged by Limbaugh's unwarranted attacks and think they were beyond the pale...he's still bleeding sponsors as I type. The outrage is real, and as more people inform themselves as to what Limbaugh did to this young woman and the half-arsed, insincere apology he offered, the more disgust there will be. And I'm not an "ilk," just a woman who resents male intrusion into the most private aspects of an innocent woman's life. Into any private citizen's life. Capiche?
Yes, it certainly offends me. Limbaugh, who is allegedly an adult male, chose to malign a young woman who had initially been denied her right to testify in front of a Congressional panel regarding the issue of women's health care.
Correction - it was a panel on whether it was constititional to enforce a mandate on a religious organization if that mandate would violate the religion's stated beliefs.
It had zippo, nada, nothing whatsoever to do with women's healthcare.
Another correction - there is no right to testify before congress.
Quote:
The panel was comprised of five MEN. That men still believe that it's their right to interfere with issues that pertain only to a woman and her physician is extremely insulting.
That liberals still use that old beaten to death fallacy that no man can have an opinion about a woman's issue is extremely insulting to my intelligence.
Men have been husbands, fathers, brothers, and sons to women since the dawn of history but suddenly women are supposed to be like aliens from outer space when it comes to anything having to do with their reproductive system.
It's just biology. It's not a mystery of the universe.
It's dumb. It was a dumb argument the first time a feminist tried to use it 40 years ago, it's been dumb all through that time, and it's dumb now.
Quote:
That they would also try to turn it into a religious issue is positively medieval.
Nevertheless, as pesky as it may be to enlightened modern folks, freedom of religion does exist in the constitution. As much as it may annoy you, you can't just ignore it.
Quote:
Rush called this young woman a sl*t, called her a prostitute, and suggested that she tape any sexual acts that she might engage in for his viewing pleasure. As a woman, a wife and a mother, this issue has everything to do with me.
As a woman, a wife, and a mother it has squat to do with you. It has to do with Sandra Fluke. Are you Sandra Fluke? No? Then it has nothing to do with you. Rush didn't insult wives or women or mothers. He insulted Sandra Fluke. You aren't her and women as a group do not have special immunity from insult. Therefore, it isn't your business.
Quote:
The men who have chosen to defend Limbaugh simply illustrates the perverse nature of far too many males, who are clearly unable to see women as human beings who are every bit as deserving of respect and equality as men.
Your comment is positively laughable. Men should treat you as equal but never insult you? Newsflash for you: men insult other men --- being called names and having your sexuality insulted is being treated equally. But when a feminist says "I want equal treatment" that translates to "I want special treatment"
Quote:
My outrage is quite real and certainly justified. The backlash against Limbaugh should be an indication that millions of women are offended,
and with good reason.
The problem is the righteous indignation of the left over the attacks on Sarah Palin was nowhere to be found. But now that it is Rush Limbaugh instead of Bill Maher, you're completely outraged. So that's what leaves us thinking you all are a bunch of partisan hypocrites.
I am well aware of the definition of libel and slander, and as I said, it is not defamation if it is true. She went before Congress specifically to make a plea for taxpayers to pay for her sexually promiscuous behavior while she attended law school.
I never said "it was a joke," I said Limbaugh's statement was true and factual, supported by her own public testimony before Congress. Therefore, it cannot be construed as defamation.
She has hardly "kept quiet," but that is irrelevant to the topic of the thread.
By obstinately sticking to that false position, you're continuing to give the wrong impression that people who disagree with Flute on the issues can't read.
Ms. Fluke never discussed her own sex life, and wanting birth control pills to be covered under one's insurance does not mean one wants to be paid for having sex. Right there is where Rushie went wrong.
Doesn't matter. Hyperbole is not defamatory.
If you don't believe that, do a search. There is a case were someone called another "a lying pig."
The court ruled that was hyperbole, and it was upheld on appeal, and there are numerous other cases in support of that.
Legally...
Correction - it was a panel on whether it was constititional to enforce a mandate on a religious organization if that mandate would violate the religion's stated beliefs.
It had zippo, nada, nothing whatsoever to do with women's healthcare.
LOL! The "violation of the religion's stated beliefs" is a women's health care issue in this case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Doesn't matter. Hyperbole is not defamatory.
If you don't believe that, do a search. There is a case were someone called another "a lying pig."
The court ruled that was hyperbole, and it was upheld on appeal, and there are numerous other cases in support of that.
Legally...
Mircea
I think it's up to a court of law to decide what's defamatory, not mircea, the anonymous CD poster. Hyperbole is exaggeration, like "this dress cost a million dollars" when it actually cost $1000, for example. Hyperbole is not calling someone who speaks up for women's rights to contraception a prostitute, a s***, or saying she wants to be paid to have sex. And Limbaugh didn't let it go even with that. He went on for two more days about Ms. Fluke.
She was a public figure when Limbaugh talked about her. And he didn't just call her names, he was listening to her story and saying that makes it sound like she is a ...
If someone goes public and represents them self as something that someone calls them, is that libel?
As for the thread title, "Are slander and libel protected by the 1st amendment? Should they be?", it would seem to me the answer is "no" because a person can sue for damages for them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
