The G.o.p's Vagina Monologue

[4588686]

[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2][left]
[b] [size=4]By [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/dana-milbank/2011/02/24/ABhhJwI_page.html"]Dana Milbank[/url], [color=#6E6E6E]Published: March 2[/color][/size][/b]
[/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2][left]

[font=Georgia, serif][size=1]
[size=4]When will Republicans stop their [url="http://www.randomhouse.com/features/ensler/vm/"]vagina monologue[/url]?[/size][/size][/font] [font=Georgia, serif][size=1]
[size=4]March is federally recognized as Women’s History Month, and Republicans have been celebrating the occasion in a most unusual style: with a burst of interest in women’s private parts.[/size][/size][/font][/left][/size][/font][/color]

[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]On Thursday, the Senate took up an[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/birth-control-exemption-bill-the-blunt-amendment-killed-in-senate/2012/03/01/gIQA4tXjkR_story.html"]amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)[/url] that would allow employers to deny women birth-control coverage if the employer found contraception morally objectionable.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]About 100 miles south of Washington on that same day, Virginia legislators passed a measure requiring a woman to be offered an [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/virginia-house-gives-final-approval-to-ultrasound-bill/2012/03/01/gIQAJY4HlR_blog.html"]ultrasound image[/url] of her fetus before aborting it. The legislation, which opponents say could also require some women who have miscarriages to be offered ultrasonic images of their dead fetuses, is the successor of a bill that would have required women to undergo an invasive “transvaginal ultrasound.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]Still on Thursday, the industrious Virginia House of Delegates also approved legislation bestowing rights on people, including a father, to bring a lawsuit over the death of the fetus.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]On Wednesday, conservative radio host[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/georgetown-president-defends-student-blasts-limbaugh/2012/03/02/gIQAnE20mR_story.html"]Rush Limbaugh[/url], a powerful influence among Republican lawmakers, described as a “slut” the law-school student invited by House Democrats to testify in support of birth control. “It makes her a prostitute,” Limbaugh said of the woman, blocked last month by House Republicans from testifying on what became an all-male panel. “She wants to be paid to have sex.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]On Tuesday, Oklahomans held a protest at the state capitol to oppose a bill, passed by the state Senate and now being taken up by the House, that would bestow [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/to-residents-of-another-washington-their-cherished-values-are-under-assault/2012/03/01/gIQAsbhXlR_story.html"]“personhood”[/url]on fetuses — one of many such efforts across the nation. Democrat [url="http://newsok.com/article/3653186"]Judy McIntyre[/url], one of just four women in the 48-member state Senate, was so upset that, according to the Oklahoman newspaper, she held a protest sign proclaiming: “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d [expletive] a senator.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]Democrats think they have a political winner in the Republicans’ fascination with reproduction at a time when economic production is what voters have in mind. The party is raising money with a petition against the “[url="http://www.dccc.org/pages/waronwomen"]Republican War on Women[/url],” and 11 Democratic women running for the U.S. Senate are using the occasion to launch a fundraising tour.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]They are attempting to tie together everything from last year’s effort to defund Planned Parenthood to the proposed repeal of Obamacare (which expanded coverage of mammography and birth control). And Obama campaign strategists tell me they are confident that the two leading Republican presidential candidates, a Mormon and a devout Catholic, will have difficulty beating the rap that the party is obsessed with reproduction.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]Evidence that the Republicans realize they’re in a pickle: Mitt Romney spontaneously flip-flopped on his initial opposition to the Blunt amendment, which would also provide employers with a moral opt-out from other elements of Obamacare. [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-camp-says-candidate-supports-blunt-amendment-on-contraceptive-coverage/2012/02/29/gIQAEyo4iR_blog.html"]Romney first said[/url] that “questions about contraception within a relationship between a man and a woman, husband and wife, I’m not going there.” But he quickly reversed himself in favor of the amendment, aligning himself with Rick Santorum, who has voiced doubts about the constitutional protections for birth control.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]More evidence: After championing the Blunt amendment, Republican leaders backed away from their demands for a vote on the provision. And Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an early proponent of the amendment after hearing about the issue during a Catholic Mass, disappeared from the debate. So Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) wound up forcing a vote on the provision, which was narrowly defeated Thursday afternoon.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]“Today, the Senate will vote on an extreme, ideological amendment to the bipartisan transportation bill,” Reid said, kicking off Thursday’s debate. “This amendment takes aim at women’s access to health care.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]The Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell (Ky.), made no mention of birth control in his reply, countering that “it is not within the power of the federal government to tell anybody what to believe, or to punish them for practicing those beliefs.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]Most other Republicans followed McConnell’s lead in avoiding mention of contraception. Sen. [url="http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-updates?ID=9d22b03a-24cf-4537-8fa2-1730b0ffedff-27k"]Orrin G. Hatch [/url](Utah), however, said the provision in the health-care law requiring preventive medical coverage for women is “questionable policy,” and he accused the administration of “deferring to its feminist allies” by mandating contraceptive coverage.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]After the amendment went down to defeat, its sponsor gave a General MacArthur. “I’m confident this issue is not over,” Blunt said. “It won’t be over until the administration figures out how to accommodate people’s religious views as it relates to these new mandates.”[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]
[color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][left][size=4]The monologue will continue.[/size][/left][/size][/font][/color]

[cmotherofpirl]

Glad you are posting all the good news, thanks

[4588686]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1330832100' post='2395989']
Glad you are posting all the good news, thanks
[/quote]

It's nice to know that you consider the self-destruction of religious right good news

[cmotherofpirl]

I think of it as the advancement of normal people over the satanic left

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1330831831' post='2395988']
[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]On Tuesday, Oklahomans held a protest at the state capitol to oppose a bill, passed by the state Senate and now being taken up by the House, that would bestow [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/to-residents-of-another-washington-their-cherished-values-are-under-assault/2012/03/01/gIQAsbhXlR_story.html"]“personhood”[/url]on fetuses — one of many such efforts across the nation. Democrat [url="http://newsok.com/article/3653186"]Judy McIntyre[/url], one of just four women in the 48-member state Senate, was so upset that, according to the Oklahoman newspaper, she held a protest sign proclaiming: “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d [expletive] a senator.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]
[/quote]
Keep the government out of my uterus (except when I want the government to buy me things for it)!

[4588686]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1330833248' post='2395996']
I think of it as the advancement of normal people over the satanic left
[/quote]

'I see' said the blind man to his deaf son.

[eagle_eye222001]

Evil, evil religious people. How DARE they object to "women's health".

where

[b]women's health = other people paying to prevent pregnancy.[/b]

Where

preventing pregnancy > freedom of religion





Access to contraception is easy and it's not a right. It's a made-up right......even if we pretend it's a right, that doesn't equal other people paying for it. That just means the state can't ban it.

[4588686]

[quote name='eagle_eye222001' timestamp='1330833898' post='2396005']
Evil, evil religious people. How DARE they object to "women's health".

where

[b]women's health = other people paying to prevent pregnancy.[/b]

Where

preventing pregnancy > freedom of religion





Access to contraception is easy and it's not a right. It's a made-up right......even if we pretend it's a right, that doesn't equal other people paying for it. That just means the state can't ban it.
[/quote]

After our other thread I have very little confidence in your willingness to debate constitutionality seriously as you have repeatedly dodged the case law I have presented which, even during period of a conservative court, has defined marriage as a right. But here we go. Although I do not think that Obama's original policy was a wise idea there is little doubt that it would be found constitutional. See Employment Division V. Smith. You do not have a right to be exempt from laws of general applicability simply because of religious objections. That is not the job of the 'satanic left' that is the work of the most entertaining and intellectual sharp justice on the court, Justice Scalia (I'm not being facetious). The Catholic Church has no special right to run a hospital. Or a University. Except to the extent that any similar entity does and the fact that said institution has a religious affiliation does not exempt it from a law of general applicability.

There is a difference between something being unwise policy and being unconstitutional.

Edited March 4, 2012 by Hasan

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1330834620' post='2396010']
After our other thread I have very little confidence in your willingness to debate constitutionality seriously as you have repeatedly dodged the case law I have presented which, even during period of a conservative court, has defined marriage as a right. But here we go. Although I do not think that Obama's original policy was a wise idea there is little doubt that it would be found constitutional. See Employment Division V. Smith. You do not have a right to be exempt from laws of general applicability simply because of religious objections. That is not the job of the 'satanic left' that is the work of the most entertaining and intellectual sharp justice on the court, Justice Scalia (I'm not being facetious). The Catholic Church has no special right to run a hospital. Or a University. Except to the extent that any similar entity does and the fact that said institution has a religious affiliation does not exempt it from a law of general applicability.

There is a difference between something being unwise policy and being unconstitutional.
[/quote]

I have little faith you'll give a real reason to allow gay marriage other than "it's a right." I responded by the way which addresses the marriage right. I haven't dodged it......dodging it would be continuing to post without addressing it. I haven't posted in that thread since you posted that.....thus I am innocent of dodging it.

True, there is no right to run a hospital...there is a religious right to object to having to pay for something you find morally wrong. This country has long recognized that.

[XIX]

The one thing that everyone overlooks is that, literally speaking, birth control is not insurance. It has nothing to do with insurance. Insurance = reduction of financial risk. I pay $50/month for auto insurance because I know I can afford it, and can't afford to pay for someone else's $80,000 ride. It has the same expected return as a bunch of lottery tickets, I'll most likely lose money, but I'll come out ahead in the unlikely event that I really need the money. That's what insurance is supposed to be.

Birth control has nothing to do with any of the above. Just like oil changes aren't covered by auto insurance, and home insurance doesn't pay for my water fiddler. My life insurance company doesn't give me "free" health meals, and if they did, the "free" health meals would drive up the cost of insurance.

Having BC covered by insurance doesn't make it more accessible. It just means that some people will get to deduct BC from their tax return, and others (most likely the unemployed or underemployed) will not.

[XIX]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1330831831' post='2395988']
[left]
[b] By [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/dana-milbank/2011/02/24/ABhhJwI_page.html"]Dana Milbank[/url], [color=#6E6E6E]Published: March 2[/color][/b][/left]

[left]

[color=#000000][font=arial][size=2]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]When will Republicans stop their [url="http://www.randomhouse.com/features/ensler/vm/"]vagina monologue[/url]?[/size][/size][/font]
[font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]March is federally recognized as Women’s History Month, and Republicans have been celebrating the occasion in a most unusual style: with a burst of interest in women’s private parts.[/size][/size][/font][/size][/font][/color][/left]


[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]On Thursday, the Senate took up an[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/birth-control-exemption-bill-the-blunt-amendment-killed-in-senate/2012/03/01/gIQA4tXjkR_story.html"]amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)[/url] that would allow employers to deny women birth-control coverage if the employer found contraception morally objectionable.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]About 100 miles south of Washington on that same day, Virginia legislators passed a measure requiring a woman to be offered an [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/virginia-politics/post/virginia-house-gives-final-approval-to-ultrasound-bill/2012/03/01/gIQAJY4HlR_blog.html"]ultrasound image[/url] of her fetus before aborting it. The legislation, which opponents say could also require some women who have miscarriages to be offered ultrasonic images of their dead fetuses, is the successor of a bill that would have required women to undergo an invasive “transvaginal ultrasound.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]Still on Thursday, the industrious Virginia House of Delegates also approved legislation bestowing rights on people, including a father, to bring a lawsuit over the death of the fetus.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]On Wednesday, conservative radio host[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/georgetown-president-defends-student-blasts-limbaugh/2012/03/02/gIQAnE20mR_story.html"]Rush Limbaugh[/url], a powerful influence among Republican lawmakers, described as a “slut” the law-school student invited by House Democrats to testify in support of birth control. “It makes her a prostitute,” Limbaugh said of the woman, blocked last month by House Republicans from testifying on what became an all-male panel. “She wants to be paid to have sex.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]On Tuesday, Oklahomans held a protest at the state capitol to oppose a bill, passed by the state Senate and now being taken up by the House, that would bestow [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/to-residents-of-another-washington-their-cherished-values-are-under-assault/2012/03/01/gIQAsbhXlR_story.html"]“personhood”[/url]on fetuses — one of many such efforts across the nation. Democrat [url="http://newsok.com/article/3653186"]Judy McIntyre[/url], one of just four women in the 48-member state Senate, was so upset that, according to the Oklahoman newspaper, she held a protest sign proclaiming: “If I wanted the government in my womb, I’d [expletive] a senator.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]Democrats think they have a political winner in the Republicans’ fascination with reproduction at a time when economic production is what voters have in mind. The party is raising money with a petition against the “[url="http://www.dccc.org/pages/waronwomen"]Republican War on Women[/url],” and 11 Democratic women running for the U.S. Senate are using the occasion to launch a fundraising tour.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]They are attempting to tie together everything from last year’s effort to defund Planned Parenthood to the proposed repeal of Obamacare (which expanded coverage of mammography and birth control). And Obama campaign strategists tell me they are confident that the two leading Republican presidential candidates, a Mormon and a devout Catholic, will have difficulty beating the rap that the party is obsessed with reproduction.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]Evidence that the Republicans realize they’re in a pickle: Mitt Romney spontaneously flip-flopped on his initial opposition to the Blunt amendment, which would also provide employers with a moral opt-out from other elements of Obamacare. [url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-camp-says-candidate-supports-blunt-amendment-on-contraceptive-coverage/2012/02/29/gIQAEyo4iR_blog.html"]Romney first said[/url] that “questions about contraception within a relationship between a man and a woman, husband and wife, I’m not going there.” But he quickly reversed himself in favor of the amendment, aligning himself with Rick Santorum, who has voiced doubts about the constitutional protections for birth control.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]More evidence: After championing the Blunt amendment, Republican leaders backed away from their demands for a vote on the provision. And Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an early proponent of the amendment after hearing about the issue during a Catholic Mass, disappeared from the debate. So Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) wound up forcing a vote on the provision, which was narrowly defeated Thursday afternoon.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]“Today, the Senate will vote on an extreme, ideological amendment to the bipartisan transportation bill,” Reid said, kicking off Thursday’s debate. “This amendment takes aim at women’s access to health care.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]The Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell (Ky.), made no mention of birth control in his reply, countering that “it is not within the power of the federal government to tell anybody what to believe, or to punish them for practicing those beliefs.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]Most other Republicans followed McConnell’s lead in avoiding mention of contraception. Sen. [url="http://republican.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-updates?ID=9d22b03a-24cf-4537-8fa2-1730b0ffedff-27k"]Orrin G. Hatch [/url](Utah), however, said the provision in the health-care law requiring preventive medical coverage for women is “questionable policy,” and he accused the administration of “deferring to its feminist allies” by mandating contraceptive coverage.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]After the amendment went down to defeat, its sponsor gave a General MacArthur. “I’m confident this issue is not over,” Blunt said. “It won’t be over until the administration figures out how to accommodate people’s religious views as it relates to these new mandates.”[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[left][color=#000000][font=Georgia, serif][size=1][size=4]The monologue will continue.[/size][/size][/font][/color][/left]

[/quote]
I literally have no idea what this article is saying. It's so poorly written. I think it's saying that the GOP is digging its own grave, but I can't even begin to figure out, logically, why it would draw that conclusion. It looks like an assertion, dressed up as an argument, but at the core is a whole lot of saying absolutely nothing.

I honestly am baffled. What is the author's point?

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='XIX' timestamp='1330840084' post='2396043']
I literally have no idea what this article is saying. It's so poorly written. I think it's saying that the GOP is digging its own grave, but I can't even begin to figure out, logically, why it would draw that conclusion. It looks like an assertion, dressed up as an argument, but at the core is a whole lot of saying absolutely nothing.

I honestly am baffled. What is the author's point?
[/quote]

This is what you get when you need to defend a position that is contradicting, and has holes, and various other problems. The only defense, is a bad offense.

[elizabeth09]

[quote name='eagle_eye222001' timestamp='1330836682' post='2396026']
I have little faith you'll give a real reason to allow gay marriage other than "it's a right." I responded by the way which addresses the marriage right. I haven't dodged it......dodging it would be continuing to post without addressing it. I haven't posted in that thread since you posted that.....thus I am innocent of dodging it.

True, there is no right to run a hospital...there is a religious right to object to having to pay for something you find morally wrong. This country has long recognized that.
[/quote]

I have to agree. Because its the women who have to hurt the most, not the men. And do not even ague because women have to go to PPH and get it.

[mortify]

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH_pIphyR-M"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH_pIphyR-M[/url]

[mortify]

I wonder what was going on in the Obama administration's collective mind when they decided to push the contraception "issue." I say that in quotes because it was a none issue until they decided to make it one. Perhaps they want to shift attention away from the "change" Obama failed to bring about... well... other than the changing for the worse. The whole issue is nonesense, and it's an obvious red herring.

Sure, I don't understand why the people who are for gay marriage are also against polygammy, but quite frankly, im a working professional and im tired of getting taxed up to my eyes. I'm tired of my money having a third of the value it did ten years ago. I'm tired of their being less jobs, and our degenerate president giving us superficial smiles and a false hope. Sorry folks, you can argue about these unjust man made laws, but this country is sunk deep. And the moral and legal disorder we see is just a symptom of cultural decandence and societal confusion.

Anyway, enough of my rant... you guys enjoy the debate