Katie Halper: Ten Deep Thoughts on the All-Male Panel on My Vagina

Seriously.

How pathetic do you have to be in order to be a troll on Newsvine of all places?

Seriously.

How pathetic do you have to be in order to be a troll on Newsvine of all places?

Well... pathetic enough to get elected as a Tea Party Republican, I'd guess.

Said it better than I could

Is a troll a bad thing?

whatever. That's got to be the most retarded statement I've ever heard. You obviously have no clue about Republicans or what they want our Gov to do and NOT do. Go ahead and spout the Liberal lines....Do you really want the GOV to mandate your BC?? Really? This BC issue is absolutely ridiculous and is nothing more than a distraction...real issue is the economy, you know JOBS and the fact that more people are in poverty now than ever before...hello? have we forgotten...How about those gas prices?? I'm appalled that OUR Government is even wasting it's fricking time debating this stupidity. Can you guys PLEASE get back to work on the REAL issues and quit distracting....Ah, the sheeple so easily distracted.

Drema: Nice attempt to deflect but you fail. Gov't is NOT mandating BC in any way whatsoever. "Real issue is Jobs", ROFLAO!!!, even the Republicans running are steering clear of jobs, they have nothing at all to say. Gas prices? Yeah I read the article today - prices are being driven up by speculation by the big banks, the 1% - haven't heard the Republicans saying a peep about that either.

Here's what's sad, OUR GOV"T isn't debating this stupidity, the Republicans are, they are having the hearings and they are the ones wasting our time and our money on this otherwise settled issue. The Catholic church has been offering BC in their insurance plans for years - this is manufactured by the republicans to divert attention for the election. Go whine at your party leaders.

One last comment most people living in poverty are children, next are single mothers. You want to deny them health coverage that will allow them to control the size of their family and prevent unwanted births. Since $20 is easy for you to afford you callously deny these women the same availability because hey they shouldn't @!$%# if they can't afford it. Your rant is uninformed and just so much more rhetorical BS.

Maggie,
I could care less who is using this issue as distraction. Most Republican women I know are asking why this is an issue? They could care less about it. I want the GOV to get back on track, quit debating ridiculous issues and start actually working on the economy (R's and D's) I've said this a MILLION times already..single mom's in poverty most likely don't have private health insurance and will utilize GOV subsidized planned parenthood or free condoms from the health dept. How is that denying a woman the right to control her family size?? The GOV already pays for BC in many many ways, so why did the gov even put this mandate on insurance co's? Again, personal responsibility has to come into play at some point, otherwise we will just continue to see society as whole deteriorate and become more impoverished. Sorry if it sounds heartless, it's what I think..if you can't afford BC when it's damn near free, maybe you shouldn't be F*&^%$#.

You don't know much about BC if you think it costs $20 a month, is safe, or that life is so simple that it all revolves around you, your needs, your abilities, your viewpoint and everybody else should be judged the same. Your menses are very much a health issue along with many other conditions, the pill can kill you and requires a medical professional to prescribe and monitor it.

Your crude denial of sex to women who can not afford BC is very telling of you as a person.

I don't think Dreama is a woman at all based on the writing and total lack of knowledge on the subject.

Since I have been a woman my entire life and have been taking BC pills for close to 20 years now...I think I know what average BC pills cost. They are 21.99 a month. They were 8 dollars from planned parenthood..I am in no way denying any woman sex...BC is provided by the GOV at little to no cost already. Your anger at someone who has a different view point is really frustrating...You KEEP bringing up medical issues and I KEEP repeating myself that I AM ALL FOR insurance co's covering BC pills if they are needed for a medical issue (Endometriosis for example which I HAVE) My insurance co does not cover BC and I don't need them to, nor do I want them to..hell, my insurance just went up 200 a month for no other reason than I turned 35..I don't want my insurance to go up another 50 bucks because now they have to cover my BC pills...Why all the frustration?

I don't think Dreama is a woman at all based on the writing and total lack of knowledge on the subject.

Really? Please oh mighty knowledgeable one...please tell me what you think I have no knowledge on. Being a woman? ha. Having an ovarian cyst and endometriosis? I can fill you in on all the details if you'd like...I am well aware of MEDICAL issues that women have. and I'll say this one more time just to be sure everyone can read it again....IF you need BC for a medical issue then your insurance should cover it. If you just want to prevent pregnancy then you should pay for that yourself. GOV should not even be in the middle of this issue.

No, actually you don't. You know about your experience with BC pills, and maybe that of your immediate family or extremely close friends but that's different from someone who had to research and find a pill that they could take. Perhaps you and your family could take general BC but not every woman can.

weekly colonoscopies

These can not be performed on right wingers because their heads always get in the way.

They told me I was crazy.

Like a fox, Pablo. Like a fox.

Do you mean like FOX?

Pablo posted at Newsvine and successfully spelled the word "to". Ergo, he is crazy like a fox and not crazy like FOX.

LOL

"Too" true.

Whew - I hope I successfully passed the FOX test.

3 years ago I told my friends that the Feds will mandate big Pharma.

As well they should - currently big Pharma spends twice on advertising than they do on developing new medicines.

I wish it was only 20 bucks. I pay 90 with insurance, without insurance it would run 450.

I guess you must be on something special then. Not only have I heard the $20 price used on TV, but a quick web search indicates that one of the most used is around $20 a month.

I also heard it argued, in a joking way, that sex without the purpose of procreation is nothing more than a recreational activity. So how far should government go to supply the needs for other recreational activities.

If you want to play that SC, all drugs that have to do with cholesterol, type 2 diabetes, COPD, cancer,etc, etc would not be covered, as they are potentialy the result of 'not living a responsible lifestyle'
Drug plans pay for drugs we need, ALL OF THEM.

I use Seasonique which gives me 1 period every three months. Since as I have mentioned I tend to hemorrhage during menses. It is also the one I had least reaction to. Not every woman can take the same meds and there is as of now, no generic. You would be surpr5ised how many women have to take a different drug that the one you see advertised.

Not every woman can take the same meds

I think this conversation just proves that most men don't actually know anything about birth control.

I think this conversation just proves that most men don't actually know anything about birth control.

Well, that certainly isn't going to stop Mr. Issa and his cohorts from telling women everything they should do in regards to their medications... damn the consequences, full speed ahead!

Rahlly, I'm for including the pills for issues other than recreation.

Vttoa, conception is not a disease....I personally think all insurance should be A-La-Carte, so if a business or person doesn't want to cover A or B, then they don't have to.

I pay 90 with insurance, without insurance it would run 450.

Who is paying the premium?

My point is even if it is used to solely prevent pregnancy it is still not for recreation. Preventing pregnancy is being responsible because it allows a child to be born into a prepared family. Which is more responsible, getting pregnant whenever it happens or once you have settled down and prepared a home?

Too many people assume that if you want the pill to prevent pregnancy then you have 'loose morals' when it means that you aren't ready for a child while you might be ready for a healthy sexual relationship with your partner. A healthy sexual relationship is good for adults. Notice I said healthy, which means I am not talking about sleeping around with 10,000 people male or female. In that case it is not merely recreational but part of a healthy lifestyle and if eventually they do decide to have a child, it will be brought into this world at a time where they can take care of it.

Attention to all men on this seed- When you get a vagina, ovaries and fallopian tubes THEN you can intelligently speak on the topic.

Until that happens do not dismiss what women tell you what they pay. For those that have insurance there are co-pays depending on the drug schedule. For those that get BC from social agencies they are often on a sliding fee scale.

In addition many women take BC because of hormonal issues like cysts and benign tumors, some take it to control migraines, or acne that may be hormonally impacted. And that is just a few instances when women take BC other than to prevent a pregnancy.

Love (and I stole this from a fellow viner yesterday) a vagina -american.

'loose morals'

Not my stand.

I also am not anti-birth control, I'm anti forcing someone else to pay for it. Since engaging in sexual relations isn't a necessary function of life, then it can be viewed as recreational if you do not want, or are prepared for, a child, then don't do it.

Vttoa, conception is not a disease....I personally think all insurance should be A-La-Carte, so if a business or person doesn't want to cover A or B, then they don't have to.

By the same argument, prostate exams shouldn't be covered because prostates aren't diseases.

We certainly shouldn't pay for prostate exams for cigarette smokers. Smoking increases the odds of developing prostate cancer and smoking is done purely for recreational purposes.

Susan, if you are providing the insurance, then I agree with you.

prostates aren't diseases

But they can become diseased, so you have to check them, I'd say cover breast exams too.

I also am not anti-birth control, I'm anti forcing someone else to pay for it. Since engaging in sexual relations isn't a necessary function of life, then it can be viewed as recreational if you do not want, or are prepared for, a child, then don't do it.

I am morally opposed to gluttony. I believe that the obesity epidemic in America is a moral failing and that no employer or health insurer should be required to pay for any medical coverage related to gluttony as it is not a "necessary function of life".

So no coverage for obesity related diabetes, high blood pressure, joint problems, or gastro intestinal issues.

Hey, while I'm at it, drinking and smoking are not "necessary functions of life", and are morally objectionable, so no more coverage for cancer, liver problems, or anything else related to alcohol or cigarette smoking.

Come to think of it, it is extremely irresponsible to not dress properly for cold weather, or touch things that could be contaminated with a virus, so that flu shot is no longer covered.

And since we are ruling out things that are not necessary..........

.......careful what you wish for.

Susan, if you are providing the insurance, then I agree with you.

So businesses get to go through every disease and decide which ones they cover based on whether or not there are any voluntary risks involved?

I see.

Yes. That will surely benefit of all America.

Yep.

I can at least give you kudos for pretending to be logical about this.

Susan, I think SCTexan is really Scott Brown, LOL

Oh and SC, we are not talking about you paying for any of it. It is WE that pay our insurance premiums (our part) and WE that pay the coopays. I don't see your @!$%#ing signature on any of my checks.

SCTexan - so you are saying that you don't want to pay for someone to have sex recreationally, correct?

So, do you object to tax money going to subsidize a mans hard-on? Or, is that a different issue? Seems many of these conservative @!$%#s have voted in the past on this issue in many states and it became law.

Let's see - Gomer Pyle Huckabee signed into law in his state a mandate that contraception be covered by you guessed it religious institutions! Now he's agin it.

I would suggest that you ignorant conservative posters on here go read up some and then come back when you have an intelligent argument, which you won't because the only intelligent thing to do is just what the President did. I think that conservative men are going to learn a thing or two about their women this year and I don't think they are going to like it!

Oh, and keep the @!$%# out of my wife and daughter's vaginas!

I apologize if this rant seems somewhat disjointed, this subject really pisses me off so I had to comment but, I had hernia surgery on Tuesday and the drugs just ain't too bad! Still in a lot of pain but I really don't give a crap! LOL!

CCArm, are you under the impression that insurance revenues are not pooled and go to pay all claims?

tax money going to subsidize a mans hard-on

requiring it, yes. But such an issue is a medical condition, keeping from getting pregnant isn't.

Huckabee signed into law in his state a mandate that contraception be covered by you guessed it religious institutions!

I feel like I keep having to repeat myself, so as I sign off today; The US Constitution gives states powers not held by the Federal government. But "I" still disagree with it at the state level. But since I don't live in Arkansas, I have no say in what they do in their state.

Wow! The total ignorance!

SCTexan: Abortion and childbirth cost a whole lot more than BC. I hardly think the lack of a hard-on is a medical problem and if my husband didn't recognize menses as a medical condition he would NEVER need a hard-on again.

The only reason the Caholic Church is so upset is that it is worried about keeeping up its steady supply of alterboys.

Really? You know that's exactly like saying all black women are welfare queens. Don't DAMN the whole by the actions of a few. I'm not even catholic and I can see what a moronic statement that is.

Taxpayers, whether male or female both have a voice in this issue as long as they are paying for the birth control and contraception of irresponsible individuals in society.

It seems to me that the use of contraceptives is being responsible. no?

It seems to me that the use of contraceptives is being responsible

Indeed, that is why women who expect government to foot the bill are acting irresponsibly. They are shifting their responsibility to the tax payer.

a dime worth of prevention

adjusting for inflation

Indeed, that is why women who expect government to foot the bill are acting irresponsibly.

Why are you targeting women with that statement?

Are you under the impression that there are no men involved or that men are not expected to take a role in contraception?

A condom is far cheaper than a pill. hmmm imagine that

Condoms are free at any public health clinic. Yet women are irresponsible? ok

The real issue of course is that men don't like to use condoms and that's why women are forced to alter their hormone levels in order to prevent a pregnancy.

I'm just trying to get my head around this idea that somehow religion is under attack by allowing women to have a say in reproduction. Instead there seems to be narrative coming from the religious right that women who want access to contraceptives through their insurance plans are irresponsible sex crazed harlots who want everyone else to pay for their debauchery.

LOL

I think you're there.

Of course men get their vasectomies covered by insurance but that's somehow different.

garrison: And what about the women who have medical problems that REQUIRE birth control pills to prevent a myriad of issues? THAT is a HUGE concern to women all over the country, and it's not just a "few" women who have these issues. Their penalty for needing birth control they can't afford? Sterility. Early menopause. Increased risk for cancer. Burst cysts (which are extremely painful and can be LIFE THREATENING).

I could go on and on, but what would be the point? You obviously know nothing about the issues other than the standard talking points and dismissive claptrap given to you by the GOTP.

Their penalty for needing birth control they can't afford?

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/birth-control-pill-4228.htm

Birth Control Pills at a Glance

• Take a pill each day to prevent pregnancy
• Safe, effective, and convenient
• Easy to get with a prescription
• Cost about $15–$50 each month

Birth control pills may be purchased with a prescription at a drugstore or clinic. They cost about $15–$50 a month.

Planned Parenthood works to make health care accessible and affordable. Some health centers are able to charge according to income. Most accept health insurance. If you qualify, Medicaid or other state programs may lower your health care costs.

And what about the women who have medical problems that REQUIRE birth control pills to prevent a myriad of issues?

I'm referring to the 98% who use it to avoid getting pregnant. Using contraceptives is being responsible. Expecting someone else to pay for it is being irresponsible.

In regards to #14.10, are you saying that women should turn to Planned Parenthood?

.

If they need to. But it is reference to how much the pills cost.

SCTexan: Only in your dreams. There are MANY types of BC pills. And they aren't all cheap. Some of them run hundreds of dollars a MONTH.

And why should I pay for your viagra? Or your prostate exams? I don't bitch about them because I'd rather pay for them then pay for hospitalization for major medical problems.

For that matter, how is it you think YOU pay for anyone else? I pay for my OWN health insurance (via the company co-pay), just as YOU pay for yours.

And would you rather pay for all the children that will be born due to the lack of BC? That costs WAY more than a few hundred dollars a month for BC pills....

And why should I pay for your viagra? Or your prostate exams?

You never have and never will because I am a responsible man.

ED has nothing to do with being responsible, it has to do with hormones, just like BC

And why should I pay for your viagra? Or your prostate exams? I don't bitch about them because I'd rather pay for them then pay for hospitalization for major medical problems.

Please read previous comments

Don't forget to include pap smears and breast exams to your list, they are all either preventative exams or treatments for a medical condition.

Deadbeats of America. Pay for your own stuff.

garrison:

because I am a responsible man.

Implying that I am not? Or that no woman is a "responsible" person?

garrison/SCTexan: So what the hell use is medical insurance at all then? What do you think should be included in MEDICAL insurance, if no medical procedures should be included?

And it still doesn't change the fact that BC pills are NOT always cheap. I noticed that you ignored that point, since it didn't fit into your nice little tidy box of crap.

So what the hell use is medical insurance at all then?

Pay for medical insurance yourself. It's irresponsible to rely on taxpayers. The court could rule Obamacare unconstitutional.

garrison: I do, along with my employer. And by the way, how are the working poor to afford paying for insurance, since most jobs at fast food restaurants do NOT offer health insurance for their employees? And if they DO offer insurance for "full time" employees, they make DAMN sure that no employee gets the required minimum 40 hours a week to become eligible.

Oh, I forget. The working poor should just DIE if they get sick. That's the GOTP "medical insurance plan" in a nutshell (I stress the word "nut").

You're right, the Court (I'm gonna go out on a limb and think you mean the Supreme Court) could rule it unconstitutional ... but many lower courts have ruled it perfectly okay and constitutional. But I guess ALL those courts are those "activist" courts we always hear the GOTP bitching about whenever a ruling doesn't go their way....

sumgai jim

A condom is far cheaper than a pill. hmmm imagine that

Condoms are free at any public health clinic.

They're free, you say. At any public clinic.

Do they just magically materialize? Grow on rubber trees?

Or are public funds used to purchase these free condoms, which are distributed at no cost at these public clinics, which - need I point out - are called "public" because they're tax-funded?

I have no issue with that program - I do take issue with this painfully obvious double standard.

And, again....

The issue is whether or not these religious businesses should include contraceptive coverage in their insurance plans - which are. Not. FREEBEES. People paying insurance premiums have a certain reasonable expectation of coverage when they're paying their part of the deal.

People paying insurance premiums have a certain reasonable expectation of coverage when they're paying their part of the deal.

All Obama is doing with this mandate is making damn sure Insurance premiums go up to cover the cost of BC. That's it! Do you really think your insurance co is going to just sit back and say ok we'll cover this for free?? Nope - your premium WILL go up.

Or are public funds used to purchase these free condoms, which are distributed at no cost at these public clinics, which - need I point out - are called "public" because they're tax-funded?

I think that's the point the GOV already provides free and cheap BC so why even make an issue out of it? Distraction from the real issues...to get women all worked up over nothing.

All Obama is doing with this mandate is making damn sure Insurance premiums go up to cover the cost of BC

right, because your health insurance premiums have never gone up before?

You take free stuff you give up your sovereign right to your body. Pay for it yourself and people couldn't care less what you do to your precious body.

oh, good lord, now comes the "sovereign citizen" marlarkey.

The other name for "sovereign citizen" is tax evader.

Garrison, why can't you get it through your tiny little thick head that no one is talking about the government payting for BC. We are talking about insurance companies covering it.

Wow, the ignorance on this thread is just unbelievable! The complete inability to have an informed opinion on the side of the right is just shocking. And it's just getting worse and worse with every new issue that comes up. It's incredible that in 21st century America people could be so easily brainwashed and unable to come up with any logical, reasonable thought. What happened to the basic ability to come up with a logical if/then statement? Oh, I forget, that would go against their religion. Thus we have people erroneously thinking that BC isn't a health issue and the planet is only 6,000 years old. Just amazing, and pathetic.

Actually it is because having a healthy relationship can include sex. And that's okay! Should I never have sex since getting pregnant will kill me? Should I live my life celibate? Or should I just take contraceptives and move on to have a healthy lifestyle which does include sex?

Let me guess, if I die it's because god wanted me to?

::rolling eyes::

Okay..but you pay for it.

Fine, engage as much as you'd like, but as IndependentVoter said, you pay for the prevention. If you can't afford an expensive version of the pill, the condoms are $.50 each or less, use two or three if you're still worried.

Oops - posted this in the wrong place.

SCTexan, just a hint for you.Men are usually users of condoms. Most women do not mind if you use one.

Any man who is having sex with anyone but his wife or LONG TERM partner should assume that the other person (gay or straight) is HIV+. The same for heterosexual women.

SCTexan: Birth control pills aren't just used for birth control. There are MANY medical issues that BC pills are prescribed for. The very fact that you and "Independent" Voter use that as your EXCUSE to be against this shows how LITTLE you know of women's health issues.

And by the way, are you aware that it's been SOP for insurance companies to charge women MORE than men for the EXACT same policy? Why is that? Since that's the case, I'd say that women for years now have been paying more than our fair share. Time for you men to shut the frell up and deal with the fact that women like sex, too, and will NOT be held hostage by men or our bodies anymore. Don't like it? Tough. I don't like having to pay for some man's Viagra, but it's on almost EVERY healthcare plan in America.

Post #20.

Michelle, read more of my posts please.....

I am for covering birth control pills for those with medical conditions, that covers something like 5% of women, that's fine. It could be argued that Viagra is correcting a medical condition, but if you want to cut it out, I'm OK with that, but there goes hormone therapy too.

face palm.

I know Sassy. That he thinks it's only 5% is ludicrous... then again he's a male! What does he know about how a woman's body works... ::riffs off 'what is war good for':: absolutely nothing, nothing! Say it AGAIN!!!! MALE, what does he know about how a woman's body works...

Well, I like to think I have a least a clue. I wasn't interested in being a jock in school, instead I worked and used to read my Mom's Cosmo. OK, OK, once I got past what at that time were pretty hot photos and actually read the articles I learned a lot that the jocks had no clue about, and they probably still don't 40 years later! Point is I have always loved women and not just for the sex but because without them there is no men no matter what the Bible says!

I.E., You all matter to me! Just ask my wife! =)

Were you peaking at the photos of Burt Reynolds CPO?

Sorry guys..the first day you have menstral cramps or ever give birth..then you can start making some decisions..

OMG Sassy. Being a woman and having a monthly cycle is not that big of a deal. Are you really trying to act like just because you are a woman who bleeds every month that you are special? Having babies is not that big of a deal especially now days...imagine if you were biting down on a stick with no c section, no spinal tap...lol. Please don't act like men don't understand just because they don't have a cycle..your being quite snobbish over something that isn't at all what your making it out to be...drama much??

I'm going to take a guess and say that your one of those women who get migranes and can't get out of bed during your monthly???LMAO!!

::hugs CPO::

Wow. Dreema are you jealous? Are you jealous of my hemmoraghing? Of other's debilitating cramps. First comers the argument that getting pregnant shouldn't be interfered with because it's a sacred thing and holy and all that bull@!$%# then come the crap that just having the ability to get pregnant is not all that special.

MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!!! By your, I mean in the plurality sense.
By the Lady!

MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!!! By your, I mean in the plurality sense.

LOL. No, not jealous at all. I've said it a million times already..if you have a medical issue that requires BC insurance should treat BC like any other prescription and cover all or a portion of the cost..I'm sorry, I'm really getting tired of typing it. Anyway, I'm not your typical R that you can just put in a box with all the others..sorry, I just don't roll down the R line. I'm pro choice, I just don't want to have to pay for that choice. I'm all for gay marriage..don't really care. What I'm most concerned about is our crappy economy, and lack of jobs. Oh, and I'm a big fan of personal responsibility...

Dreama, your attitude is the most pathetic of them all. Too bad you hate yourself so much that you translate that hate to other women. Actually, given how ignorant you seem to be of the actual facts of being a woman I'm beginning to wonder if you are a woman. Pregnancy is "no big deal." REALLY!? Tell it to my friend who died in child birth, or another friend of mine who had a major stroke when delivering her child or to the millions of women around the world who have died giving birth. You know NOTHING. Pregnancy and delivering a baby are both dangerous and can be life-threatening. Every day in this country women die or are disabled in some way from childbirth. You disgust me in your callous disregard for the lives of women. And everyone with your attitude, especially if you really are a women, which I highly doubt, should be ashamed of yourselves.

Dreama- just like getting kicked in the balls is no big deal? Child birth is like that times 20 for up to 30 hours or so for some. Your ignorance shines through.

Guess you wouldn't know the pain associated with endometriosis, etopic pregnancy, ovartian cysts, fibroids since you have none of the parts. See you happen to fall into the category- if it doesn't happen to me it can't possible be, or exist, or doesn't matter. I feel sorry for you..I really do. I am sure this type of attitude permeates your life.

Wrong Sassy. You know nothing about me but if you want to see my GYN records I'll gladly share them with you...Endometriosis, yep. Uterine Fibroids..yep. Ovarian Cyst..oh, yeah. I know exactly the pain associated with these issues..my ovulation cramps are worse than most women's period cramps...so..my ignorance shines through? How many @!$%#ing times do I have to repeat this before your ignorance can grasp it? IF you need BC for a medical issue, it should be covered. Do you need me to say it again????

PsychDoc,

Your name says it all...I don't hate myself and I don't hate other women, where in the hell did you get that crazy idea?My attitude is pathetic? Why? because I don't need the Gov to force my insurance co to pay for my BC?

Yes Child birth is painful, yes it can be life threatening. and insurance covers child birth. Child birth is not the issue. My point in this whole conversation is that BC pills is not a women's health issue. (child birth, mammograms, PAP's are) The Gov should not be mandating anything about BC pills. Do you get the point now? Oh and I'm sooooo sorry if I have less compassion than you think I should have. I was only comparing child birth now, with c sections, spinal taps, pain medications, etc. to what it must of been like to have a baby with nothing but a frickin stick between your teeth. If child birth was sooo horrible, so ungodly painful, so utterly insane then why do women choose to have more than one child? You would think that we wouldn't want to go through it again...but, we do. A little too much drama about the pains of being a woman if you ask me.

Sorry Dreama, but you fail yet again. Your attitude is pathetic and everything you've written indicates that you hate women. And you are the one that said pregnancy is no big deal. Now you're trying to backtrack and change the subject. Nice try, but no. This is so typical with the right wing. You get called out on your inane, illogical crap and then you scramble to say "I didn't say that" when clearly you did, or change the subject to something irrelevant. Thanks for proving my point that those on the right don't seem to be able to have a logical thought.

It's not that you have less compassion than you should, it's that you have none. The majority of people on the right have no humanity and no empathy. You're all out for yourselves, unless of course you need or want something, then you'll scream bloody murder until you get it. And just because you say over and over again that BC isn't a health issue, will never make it so. Again, the lack of logic is astounding. But it's exactly what I'd expect. At least you're predictable.

Psychodoc -but you fail yet again.

LMAO!! good thing I don't need your grade.

Everything I've written in no way indicates I hate women. I hope you have no plans on becoming a psychologist...I'd work on something else if I where you.

How is Birth control a women's health issue, if it is only being used to prevent pregnancy? Please explain that to me. I have said over and over again that if you need BC for a MEDICAL issue then your insurance should cover it. I've said it a million times.If you are taking BC for NO other reason than to prevent pregnancy...explain how that is a women's health issue. Please. It's not and you saying it is..doesn't make it so.

How is my attitude pathetic? Because I have an unreasonable expectation for people to have a little bit of responsibility for their own sexuality? That is so unreasonable of me?

And you are the one that said pregnancy is no big deal

as I said before, "especially now days with c sections, meds, spinal taps etc" if you are going to try and quote me..do it right. I was comparing child birth today to child birth with nothing but a stick between your teeth...in both comments. No back tracking, no trying to deny I said it. Where you got that from.....?? like I said before I certainly hope your not going for some degree in Psych.. you'd fail. You can't even pick apart a simple comment without getting it wrong.

warning** some sarcsm coming your way (just in case you don't grasp that it is in fact sarcasm).

..you obviously have no expectation that American women can think and make good decisions for their own lives...You must think that we women are so stupid that the GOV has to mandate our insurance co's to cover BC pills for us so that our stupid asses will maybe take them. Obviously we can't be responsible enough, so maybe the GOV should create some jobs and send people out to make sure the pills get shoved down our throats everyday.....THAT'S PATHETIC.

Thanks yet again for making my point about the backtracking and the changing the subject. You said that pregnancy was no big deal. Your other qualifiers to that statment are irrelevant. You then went on to say how life-threatening it can be and now you're back tracking again. And then you try to change the subject to my thinking women are stupid. Actually your comment if quite easy to pick apart because it makes no sense. Pathetic attempt at a comeback. And birth control is a health issue because some people WILL DIE IF THEY GET PREGNANT and it's not always possible to tell ahead of time. That's just one reason. It's a health issue because pregnancy can cause all kinds of issues and complications. Can I make that ANY plainer for you???? And in case you can't get this, taking birth control IS taking responsibility for their sexuality. Yeesh, I just can't take the ignorance anymore. Furthermore it's none of your damn business why a woman takes birth control. We don't deny coverage for erectile dysfunction meds because a man might want to have sex but not have it lead to pregnancy.

As I said, your attitude paints you as misogynist. But please DO keep on saying the same things over and over again and painting yourself as some champion for women. Because that's just pathetic all on it's own. I'm done. I've got better things to do than argue with someone who clearly can't see reason and thinks that repeating the same thing over and over again actually constitutes a logical argument for their position. You have given absolutely no GOOD reason why insurance shouldn't cover birth control. You know why, because there isn't one. I don't see you arguing that Viagra shouldn't be covered. How about HTN or COPD meds? Those are related to life-style choices as well. Should we just start cherry-picking every drug and disease until we don't cover anything?

By the way, these are rhetorical questions as far as you're concerned since I don't expect any more logic out of you than I've seen. But hey, thanks for playing and losing yet again.

Dear psychodoc- well said. thank you. Dreama I stand by what I say. Guess we have to agree to disagree...

"Independent"Voter: Sure ... but could anyone actually AFFORD that? The reason that plans are sold is to spread the cost out over a segment of the population, thereby making it possible for people to afford healthcare coverage and the insurance company to keep raking in BILLIONS every year with a minimum of payout.

Would you like to be covered if you get cancer? Under your "plan," you will likely have to pay through the nose for such a policy, especially if you have a family history with lots of cancer in it, as I do. I've lost both parents and ALL my grandparents to some form of cancer. Do you honestly believe that ANY insurance company would give me and those like me affordable coverage for cancer?!? No - it would be considered a "pre-exisiting condition," along with any kind of reproductive coverage (my family also has a history of uterine cysts, breast cancer, and early hysterectomies).

By the way, I'm wondering why this issue is such a problem for the GOTP now? Since MANY governors and former governors from the GOTP have signed into state law exactly the same kind of mandate that Obama has. A couple of them (notably Iowa) don't even give exemptions to churches. And the GOTP had NO problem with this. Why is it a "war on religion" all of a sudden now, but wasn't when they did it?

Because it's not about healthcare. It's about painting Obama as some "other" to be feared. That's all they have ... FEAR. They can't run on the economy because it's improving. They can't run on jobs, because that's also improving, despite their best efforts to make things worse in the effort to defeat Obama at any cost.

When businesses began offering insurance to employees, IMO, began the bastardization on the purpose of insurance. It's gone from a product to help out in case of a catastrophic event, to a product that is viewed by some as a right that should pay for everything.

Since MANY governors and former governors from the GOTP have signed into state law

Under the Constitution, states have more authority than the federal government. But if you have a link, I'd like to see it.

As for your cancer example, many of us believe there are other ways to accomplish the same thing you want, without a federal mandate.

Why is it a "war on religion"

Part of the issue is that many Churches are self insured, which mean that you are requiring them to pay for something against their core beliefs. Imagine, if you will, that a Jewish or Muslim hospital was require to serve pork instead of beef. How far do you think that would go?

It's about painting Obama as some "other" to be feared.

You are correct, if you like big government and the move toward the nanny state, you will be fine with many of his policies, if you're not, then you do fear his policies.

HEY why not mandate insurance companies to cover the cost of infertility...I mean who the hell can afford the IVF? If your going to pay for prevention you might as well pay for infertility too! what is IVF running??? 10,000 a go? I'm sending a letter to my congressman right now.. ha ha

Wanna bet?

If Santorum gets the Presidency, how long do you think it'll take him to start trying to outlaw homosexuality and make it a death penalty offense? He's intimated as much.

Religious freedom does not equate to the freedom to repress those who don't share your beliefs

Bill: Then why was this not a "war on religion" when the GOTP state governments mandated covering birth control? Iowa doesn't even give churches exemptions.

Oh, I keep forgetting. IOKIYAR.

Evidently all the men on the all-men panel care, so to speak.

That is your job.

My point is what happened to the focus on jobs and the economy ? It is like overnight a switch was flipped and economic issues were thrown out the window by the Republican party and replaced with religious and social issues. Again how does birth control pills, gay marriage or abortion create jobs. I believe that question is simple enough to understand. Is it that wedge issues are all they now have?

Yeah...women are just to stupid to think for themselves...they are fortunate to have you around to tell them what is best for them.

Republican women don't give a crap about this issue because they don't expect BC to be included as "women's health". It's not about women's health, it's about GOV mandating, mandating, mandating. Liberal women are the only ones foolish enough to get sucked into this absurdity. I am woman hear me roar..but coddle me because you just don't understand what it's like to be a woman and have to pay money out of my own pocket to supply my own BC. Please...take a midol, and let's get back to the real issue..the economy!

They're too busy hating the gays or late term abortions to even realize it's their own A$$ on the line this time.

Nope! Most Republican's could care less if you are gay or lesbian..don't care what you do in your bedroom. another non issue the left likes to bring up..again, the real issue is the ECONOMY. Republican women's asses aren't on the line..we don't want nor expect GOV or Insurance co's to cover BC.

Republican women don't give a crap about this issue

Except for Female Republican Senators

Except for Female Republican Senators

who are just as self serving as the rest of the elected officials. I'm talking about...you know..normal, average, everyday people.Not women who are worried about getting votes.

normal, average, everyday people.

ROFLMAO!! :-))))

Ouch, I must have stepped on some toes. I was not talking about all women in the USA, just those sucked into the Tea Party / Ideological tempest in the Right Wing Teapot.

Anyone with a brain knows that voting for ideological ideals when the national economy is in the drink is on a fool’s errand.

I think it's possible the republicons feel they have nearly nothing left to lose so their just going to go for broke.

Very true Strider, they are at the point where it's "well, we're @!$%#ed already so if we are going down may as well do it big"!

It's kinda like when the Nazis were about to lose and then turned on their own people, the whole "If I go down then I'm taking you with me!" mentality.

cricket, a quick scan of your link indicates religious groups can get a exclusion from the requirement.

Not all states provide the exclusion, and didn't Obama provide an exclusion for churches etc. Not all employees of catholic hospitals are catholic--enforcing and/or forcing their religious beliefs via health care would be a violation of the constitution....