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.
I just logged on and was pleasantly surprised to see all the SANE and RATIONAL posts for once!
I guess I kind of expected the "Fluke is a prostitute" and "Rush is a god" crowd to have chimed in but how nice to see reasonable people posting this morning.
The answer is yes. Colleges and universities (not community colleges) require health insurance. If you have your own then you are exempt from purchasing theirs (via the student's own policy or their parents). However, the insurance provided by the schools is much more affordable for students than purchasing on their own.
Wrong, according to a 2008 report, only 30% of colleges require students to have health insurance.
ETA: Sandra Fluke was not asking for FREE contraception, she was asking that the insurance cover contraception in the same manner that they cover other medicines so that she would only have to pay a portion instead of 100% of the cost. The same way that they cover medicine for any other ailment. Birth control pills are used for more than just preventing pregnancy; they are used for dysmennorhea, PCOS and many other medical conditions that are specific to women. Why deny a young woman who is a virgin who suffers from PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) the medicine that she needs to for her medical condition?
Sandra Fluke says that the university already supplies birth control pills for medical-conditions(like Polycystic Ovary Syndrome). She wanted birth control for its original purpose, to prevent pregnancy.
No one is saying she wants free birth control, but she basically wants the cost of the pills to be subsidized. That isn't what she is saying, but that is what she means. Because she effectively wants to force everyone who doesn't want birth control pills to help pay for her pills. If she didn't, then she would just pay for her own pills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
All the colleges my kids attended had such a requirement. She probably went to Georgetown b/c it is highly rated in the field she is studying.
I could care less why she went to Georgetown, she didn't have to go to Georgetown if they weren't providing her with the health insurance that she needed. Instead of leaving Georgetown and going somewhere else, or even trying to get the policy changed, she is trying to use the federal government to control policy at Georgetown. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whyfor
For right or wrong, we (as a country) already consider it acceptable for the state/federal government to mandate things that insurance companies are required to sell as part of their policies. I'm not sure why anyone would think that this is a special or unusual case.
As far as the school is concerned, they already sell this "product" (as has been previously noted), they just refuse to allow Ms. Fluke (and all students) to purchase it. It's just that pointing out this obvious double standard has been labeled "an attack on religion" by those who think this is a perfectly acceptable way to behave.
I don't agree with the federal government mandating anything with insurance companies. I do expect the federal government to prevent fraud or coercion. But I do not believe the federal government has the right to tell a business what it must sell.
As for the insurance itself. The Birth control is only prescribed for certain conditions that require it, which is typical of any medication.
Take for instance hair loss. Should Propecia be required to be covered under the college insurance program? Is it a medical condition? Losing your hair is not a medical condition, it is a cosmetic issue.
Now look at Proscar. Proscar is used for enlarged prostates, and proscar is just a higher dose version of propecia.
So lets pretend that a school refuses to give out propecia in their insurance program, but did give out proscar. Even though a person could simply cut proscar up into smaller pieces and is exactly the same as propecia?
Medications are prescribed for certain conditions and purposes. Just because a medication has multiple purposes does not mean that a university should be compelled to provide the medication for both purposes.
Uh-oh I watched the video of the View where they discuss little Miss Palin. Looks like Barbara Walters has to get in line for the crack she made about America's Most Famous Unwed Mother.
Sandra Fluke says that the university already supplies birth control pills for medical-conditions(like Polycystic Ovary Syndrome). She wanted birth control for its original purpose, to prevent pregnancy.
No one is saying she wants free birth control, but she basically wants the cost of the pills to be subsidized. That isn't what she is saying, but that is what she means. Because she effectively wants to force everyone who doesn't want birth control pills to help pay for her pills. If she didn't, then she would just pay for her own pills.
I could care less why she went to Georgetown, she didn't have to go to Georgetown if they weren't providing her with the health insurance that she needed. Instead of leaving Georgetown and going somewhere else, or even trying to get the policy changed, she is trying to use the federal government to control policy at Georgetown. Period.
I don't agree with the federal government mandating anything with insurance companies. I do expect the federal government to prevent fraud or coercion. But I do not believe the federal government has the right to tell a business what it must sell.
As for the insurance itself. The Birth control is only prescribed for certain conditions that require it, which is typical of any medication.
Take for instance hair loss. Should Propecia be required to be covered under the college insurance program? Is it a medical condition? Losing your hair is not a medical condition, it is a cosmetic issue.
Now look at Proscar. Proscar is used for enlarged prostates, and proscar is just a higher dose version of propecia.
So lets pretend that a school refuses to give out propecia in their insurance program, but did give out proscar. Even though a person could simply cut proscar up into smaller pieces and is exactly the same as propecia?
Medications are prescribed for certain conditions and purposes. Just because a medication has multiple purposes does not mean that a university should be compelled to provide the medication for both purposes.
An article I found regarding 2008 says 38% required insurance, up from 25% in 2006. It is reasonable to assume that more require it in 2012.
I agree, it is reasonable to assume that more require it in 2012. But that isn't the point.
My point is that, I am 99.9% positive Sandra Fluke did not have to go to Georgetown university to become a lawyer. The fact that she both enrolled in Georgetown and continues to go to Georgetown, is indicative that while things aren't perfect at Georgetown, it is still preferable for her than other schools. And if she really strongly opposed Georgetown's insurance policy, then she would choose another school which did provide her with what she wanted.
Look at it like this, what if my cable provider didn't provide some channel that I wanted. How should I go about remedying the situation? I can request the change, but if they don't add the channel, what do I do? Well, I could always find a different company that would provide me with the service that I wanted. I am not required to stick with Comcast or dishnetwork or Verizon or whatever else. If I don't like their service, I go somewhere else. And if I don't go somewhere else, its because their service is still preferable than the other options. And I do not have the right at that point to use the government to force my cable company to provide me the channel that I want. Nor should the government have that authority in the first place.
I hate to be callous, but she comes off as a demanding *****, and the fact that she is requesting birth control pills does nothing to stop people from assuming she is a massive ****. This argument is not about Fluke, this argument is really about the role of government, and whether or not birth control is a right. Liberals see birth control and abortion as basically a human right, and not only believe they should be legal, but really believe that any woman that wants either should have free access to them. Because no woman should be forced to have an unwanted pregnancy.
I don't agree with the federal government mandating anything with insurance companies. I do expect the federal government to prevent fraud or coercion. But I do not believe the federal government has the right to tell a business what it must sell.
As for the insurance itself. The Birth control is only prescribed for certain conditions that require it, which is typical of any medication.
Take for instance hair loss. Should Propecia be required to be covered under the college insurance program? Is it a medical condition? Losing your hair is not a medical condition, it is a cosmetic issue.
Now look at Proscar. Proscar is used for enlarged prostates, and proscar is just a higher dose version of propecia.
So lets pretend that a school refuses to give out propecia in their insurance program, but did give out proscar. Even though a person could simply cut proscar up into smaller pieces and is exactly the same as propecia?
Medications are prescribed for certain conditions and purposes. Just because a medication has multiple purposes does not mean that a university should be compelled to provide the medication for both purposes.
You don't believe in mandates, I have no problem with that. That's a reasonable question to debate.
As far as the rest of what you said, I'm not arguing about the issue of medications with multiple purposes (although I do find it amusing that they'll cover it for off-label or alternate uses but not for its primary purpose). I would also question comparing pregnancy or potential pregnancy to a "cosmetic" condition....I think there's a bit more to it than that (in my opinion). But here's my original point, and I'll quote the relevant part of what I said before....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whyfor
As far as the school is concerned, they already sell this "product" (as has been previously noted), they just refuse to allow Ms. Fluke (and all students) to purchase it. It's just that pointing out this obvious double standard has been labeled "an attack on religion" by those who think this is a perfectly acceptable way to behave.
What I'm trying to say, again, is....they already offer/cover/sell contraception coverage to all of their staff and faculty, but they refuse to do so for their students. It's extreeeeemely disingenuous to claim "religious freedom" or "attack on religious expression" to deny to students something which they already are willing to pay for (and in fact DO pay for) for their staff/faculty. That is the "double standard" that I find so appalling, and I don't understand how the religious crowd can maintain the rhetoric with a straight face. Why, again, was Ms. Fluke so unreasonable for asking the university to include students in something that they already pay for?
And as an aside to this question, an observation regarding this statement....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
I hate to be callous, but she comes off as a demanding *****, and the fact that she is requesting birth control pills does nothing to stop people from assuming she is a massive ****.
Why do "people" automatically assume that women using birth control are not married or in committed relationships? While I'll grant that the percentage is likely lower in a university environment, this idea that all women want birth control in order to more efficiently sleep around is ridiculous. Apparently not everyone shares that opinion though....
You guys really make me want to throw my computer in a river to pretend like you don't exist. A bunch of disgusting hypocrites who take glee in tearing people down.
Here's your big difference, non-thinking people:
Fluke is a PRIVATE citizen
Bristol is a PUBLIC citizen.
If Bristol does not want criticism, she should not put herself out there on reality TV shows. Should the president call to apologize because she sucked on Dancing With The Stars?
Mama idiot got it piled on her because she presented herself as some beacon of family values, when she's anything but. That invites attack, and it is fair.
So, I will say it here: Sarah Palin is a complete moron who uses whatever is left of her looks for political gain. That makes her a prostitute who only exists to try to get her image out there, anywhere.
Bristol Palin is... I've actually never thought that much about her, so I have no opinion. I feel bad that her mother dragged her into the limelight in the first place.
Fluke is a private citizen that testified in Congress.
There's your big difference. Get it yet?
Haven you not seen all of the interviews Miss Fluke has been doing? I don't think she qualifies as a private citizen anymore. Miss Palin was catching crap for left wing nuts before she even considered a reality Tv show. They gave her crap because shes a Palin. Sara Palin uses her brain and common sense, which ive noticed is lacking on the left. Are you sure you're no mixing up Palin and Debbie Wasserman Schultz?
Haven you not seen all of the interviews Miss Fluke has been doing? I don't think she qualifies as a private citizen anymore. Miss Palin was catching crap for left wing nuts before she even considered a reality Tv show. They gave her crap because shes a Palin. Sara Palin uses her brain and common sense, which ive noticed is lacking on the left. Are you sure you're no mixing up Palin and Debbie Wasserman Schultz?
This is why I have long said there is no such thing as "common sense".
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.
