Just Let Me -- G -- Indoctrinate You!

Monday, March 5, 2012

It's Good Self-Government vs. Everybody Else Thing

Dear America,

for the sake of moving through this discussion as quickly as possible -- because the topic is ridiculous when you get down to it    -- we will totally ignore the candid, sloppy, off-putting, sarcasm out of the mouth of Rush Limbaugh. Without being clear on how he said it, the full context, and bearing in mind his usual flair for making a point while being totally absurd (even if it is rooted in a simple truth) -- I do not know where to begin with his remarks on a Fluke. [not to mention, he's a big boy and can take care of himself, with or without the sincere apology]

But let's get down to this:  Sandra Fluke, the law student from Georgetown, on a scholarship, speaking before Congress, said this:

now, let's be clear, most birth control amounts to about a dollar a day.

AND, it is widely available through any clinic, pharmacy, and even on-line.

Now Sandra, actually pinned it down to a number -- $3,000/ to cover birth control through law school...or as she puts it, "an entire summer salary" -- essentially leaving women feeling "powerless,"  as they have "no other choice" but walk away without contraception, for the cost is just too high.

Now Sandra also comes up with a number of personal stories to heighten the sense of urgency, including a married couple who can no longer afford birth control --  to citing another women, who claims to need the oral contraception only to treat her poly-cystic ovarian syndrome (she doesn't need it for having "protected sex" per se, as this particular woman is gay).

so let me get this straight -- she is gay, and yet she needs to have birth control? this woman is on birth control, for treatment of ovarian cysts, and you, Sandra, expect all health organizations (essentially me) to pay for that? she doesn't have sex with men -- which carries the only natural potential she has to conceive a child -- and yet you want me to cover for her birth control?  [I feel like 'Elle Woods', when leading up to her final courtroom blow in Legally Blond]

so which is it?  Is it actually about birth control -- or -- is more like getting free medication to treat any number of female ailments normally treated with hormones and various other gynecological medications?

For if Sandra's argument includes everything under the "all of the above" column, as in any female reason under the sun -- if you need to take a pill to treat hormonal fluctuations, cysts, pain, menstrual cycle, and maybe even prevent a pregnancy along the way -- it should be fully paid for through the Affordable Care Act as prescribed by the Obama Administration without prejudice, and especially without "interrogation."

Now Sandra, you're studying law -- and yet you seem to have a few inconsistencies in your argument.

For starters:  medication is medication is medication.  What makes the need for "birth control" the exception to the rule?  Isn't Diabetes medicine just as essential on a daily basis?  Why isn't that free and fully covered under the Affordable Care Act, too?

If it is really about afford-ability --  the truth is, any smart girl can make the necessary adjustments.  If using birth control is important (as it should be) then cutting back on coffee might be a good place to start.  Perhaps one less trip to Urban Outfitters.  Maybe skipping the second pint of beer, or totally eliminating the pizza night.  And certainly, if it is you -- the woman -- taking the oral birth control pill -- just maybe 'the boy' involved should step up with the condoms.  just sayin' .... fair is fair.

And look at you, Sandra, already on a 'public-interest scholarship' -- are you kidding me?

But let's be clear, "birth control" or "pregnancy prevention" is not a right...just as penal erection meds are not a right. and if you think there is no connection to the two, think again --  where does it stop?

For according to Sandra's world -- all contraception, should be no charge... I guess that means tubal ligations, no charge; vasectomies, no charge; abortions, no charge; condoms for everybody, no charge. 

Why stop there, right?  STD medication, no charge; breast augmentation, no charge; penal enlargement, no charge; erection medication, no charge.

Oh right, she did make a point to name some serious issues -- let's get to those: treatment of ovarian cysts, no charge; treatment of endomytriosis, no charge; hysterectomies, no charge; transgender operations, no charge.

Oh but what about going the other way -- fertility drugs, no charge; invitro fertilization, no charge.

How about this just to simplify things -- anything affecting the sexual experience in it's entirety, in all it's glory, should be protected and covered under this new law.

Let everybody eat crackers --  in bed -- and be happy.

This is where feminists and little old G have a real problem.  Albeit Sandra lands herself on a great platform for women's advocacy -- what we miss in the debate is the deeper, more important, discussion: women honoring their bodies, their self-worth, and their reproductive futures.  People like Sandra seem to wish to skip right over it, as if deemed meaningless, in and of itself, without room for discussion.  we can't even talk about the cultural cornerstones of intimacy and love and marriage -- for that has nothing to do with it anymore...

...sure, let's just have free sex with the lights off -- I'm sure everything will be just fine.  [did you hear it??  the screaming sarcasm?? huh? huh?]

Now Sandra, you seem sharp -- are you really saying Birth Control is now a right in this country?

For immediately, this gives half the populace "something borrowed, something free" just because they are born of the female persuasion; how is that fair?

And wouldn't this just be the beginning of a slippery slope, deeming all medication worthy of supplementation -- even if it bankrupts every pharmaceutical company, health institution, long term benefits/retirement plans, Medicare/Medicaid, and the like, in the process?

Women's rights, women's rights -- blah blah blah

Just where, oh where, is every woman's self-reliance?

Women have the power to control their own destiny in every way -- especially with regard to choosing to prevent a pregnancy, or not.

As a woman, I can relate, AND I still have NO right to ask anyone to pay for my birth control; while in this day and age, seems all forms of birth control -- as it is, at a ridiculously reasonable monthly rate -- is widely available; there is no excuse for not being protected.  And if you're not protected, maybe you should forgo the roll in the hay until you can protect yourself.

As a woman (and just like a man) -- I have a RIGHT (and duty) of good, sound, responsible SELF-GOVERNMENT.   This kind of self-government is associated with the innumerable UNALIENABLE RIGHTS our founders fully intended, however not expressly spelled out (for they were widely assumed) when writing our Declaration of Independence.  [And yes, even good use of The Law is based on certain assumptions; and it especially works with Nature's Law...but I digress]

The thing is -- one woman's birth control is no different than another man's Viagra; one women's Yaz pill, is no different than another woman's diabetes shot; medication -- for anything -- is simply medication.

My daughter's medical insurance just went up 28%.  It's sure to be compensating for such new birth control policy as "covered" under the "Affordable Care Law."

Everybody is paying for people like Sandra Fluke to have "protected sex" now -- surely, we should see abortion rates go down, STD's dramatically reduced, along with plenty of liberated women dancing in the streets.  yea.

Make it a Good Day, G

and never mind that Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a C&@T and got away with it.

1 comment:

  1. In the end, nothing matters except God!

    Science, Theory of Relativity, has proven that the Universe was 'created' from a 'big bang' from a single point 24.5 B years ago. Who lit the fuse?