"For each will have to bear his own load."
- Galatians 6:5 ESV
A co-ed named Sandra Fluke made a splash in the media and the blogosphere after she testified before Congress advocating for insurance coverage of free contraceptives by religious entities (her school, Georgetown University, being one of them), as mandated under Obamacare's birth control provision. Religious groups, especially the Catholic Church, strongly oppose this mandate as it infringes on the Constitutional basic right to religious freedoms and on their faith's tenet of opposing unnatural birth control methods. What grabbed the most headlines, though, was her claim that " birth control costs her up to $3000 a year" causing her, as a student on public interest scholarship, undue financial burden. Her testimony stirred even more controversy after radio show host Rush Limbaugh called her a "sl*t" (he has since apologized). President Obama himself also made a personal call to Fluke thanking her for speaking about the concerns of American women and to "tell her parents that they should be proud of her."
In her testimony, Sandra Fluke stated that "conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what did you expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success."
Fluke needs to be reminded that schools and universities, religious or not, exist to promote academic success so that young people can be positive contributors to our society, be it in the field of medicine, technology, education, or research and development. Nowhere in any single school's platform or goal can it be found to encourage students be active participants in fulfilling the carnal desire of their communities.
Fluke may be an unabashed advocate for women's reproductive justice but sexual activities are NOT Constitution-guaranteed rights but are personal, private choices made by each individual. No one has the right to require his/her classmate, neighbor, pastors/priests or the American taxpayers to pay for their personal, recreational bedroom pleasures. A little common sense tells us that if you cannot afford to buy your own contraceptives, then please practice some self-control. Nobody dies from a celibate way of life. But the most sensible thing to do is to ask your partner to split the bill. After all, it takes two to tango and so it is with the cost of their own private escapades.
I was going to do the math and check the accuracy of Fluke's claim of $3000 per year costs of contraceptives but found this clever nugget from a certain Dennis Dev, posted on Facebook on March 2nd, 2012. This is what Mr. Dev had to say:
"Ok, so let me get this straight - Sandra Fluke says that she has so much sex that she can't afford the birth control because she is a college student and it is putting a strain on her budget and her social life at Georgetown University. She says birth control protection costs her $3000 per year, a whole summer's salary!
Ok, so why didn't anyone at the congressional hearing or in the media challenge that $3000 figure? Where's Bill O'Reilly when you need him? Why didn't Rush Limbaugh challenge this figure? Ok, I will!
According to Planned Parenthood, the pill costs between $15 and $50 per month, depending on type used. Let's see: that comes to between $180 and $600 per year - not even close to the $3000 figure. Is she lying or what?
So, what does Sandra Fluke use for birth control that costs $3000/yr? Oh, maybe it's condoms! Let's see, condoms at Walmart run $11 for a pack of 40 LifeStyles Ultra Sensitive condoms, and between $9 and $18 for a pack of 36 condoms, depending on brand. So, lets assume she buys the economy pack- 40 condoms at $11 per pack (why aren't the guys buying the condoms?). At $3000 per year, that's 272 boxes of condoms per year, or 10,880 condoms per year. Wow, is that a lot of sex or what?
If you do the math and divide 10,880 condoms/yr by 365 days/yr, she goes through 29.8 condoms per day (and guys - no one guy I know could do this), 365 days per year, and she wants us to believe that and pay her for it! When does she have time to go to school? And she and the media and the Dems are outraged by what Rush Limbaugh said about her? To top it all off, Obama calls her today and congratulates her and tell her that her parents should be very proud of her! Yea, right - I'm sure all of you would be very proud of your daughter if she did this and then publicly announced it and wanted others to pay for it. Give me a break!"
As amusing as Mr. Dev's take on Ms. Fluke's testimony, if it was ever humanly possible to be this sexually active, even the simplest elementary math cannot add up to a $3000 contraceptive costs that she claimed, unless, in her calculation, she also added the hidden costs of sometimes unintended consequence of sex - abortion. After all, when you are having this much fun, who wants to be punished with a baby? Sandra Fluke and her peers cannot be inconvenienced with an unplanned pregnancy. No wonder then that she finds support and encouragement from the most uncompromising abortion advocate-president in our nation's history.
It is unconscionable, if not downright twisted, for Fluke to lobby Georgetown University (which she is attending on her own free will) for free birth control coverage, which subsequently includes abortion, when abortion is an act that is very much against the core doctrine of the Jesuit faith.
It is also utterly deceitful of Sandra Fluke, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi who called her to testify, to frame her testimony as a fight for women's "reproductive rights" and "health issues" when we all are smart enough to know that the ultimate purpose of this hearing is to protect and advance the abortion cause. Because when babies are being aborted, what exactly are they "reproducing"? When doctors decry the use of simple laxative as a dieting tool, how is it promoting women's health when fetuses with beating hearts are purged out of their mothers' bodies with pills or through surgical procedure?
I was not part of the party-crazed crowd back when I was a college student. My parents paid for every bit of my education so I did what they expected me to do - hit the books. Now that I am a parent myself with a child in college, I am not so sure which is more frightening: (1) that we are raising a generation who feels entitled to other people's money and displays the outrageous audacity to demand that the American people pay for the cost and consequence of their actions in their "pursuit of happiness", or (2) our president, the leader of the free world, who openly applauds the likes of Sandra Fluke for exercising their reproductive rights but, with equal audacity, lays the financial responsibility and accountability of their personal, recreational choices on the laps of the taxpayers then demagogue the rich and our job-creators at every turn for "not doing their fair share."
If we as a people have not prayed for common sense in a long while, I think it's high time that we get down on our knees and ask, for the sake of our country's future stewards, for some serious divine awakening ... otherwise, as a nation, we're screwed.
- Galatians 6:5 ESV
A co-ed named Sandra Fluke made a splash in the media and the blogosphere after she testified before Congress advocating for insurance coverage of free contraceptives by religious entities (her school, Georgetown University, being one of them), as mandated under Obamacare's birth control provision. Religious groups, especially the Catholic Church, strongly oppose this mandate as it infringes on the Constitutional basic right to religious freedoms and on their faith's tenet of opposing unnatural birth control methods. What grabbed the most headlines, though, was her claim that " birth control costs her up to $3000 a year" causing her, as a student on public interest scholarship, undue financial burden. Her testimony stirred even more controversy after radio show host Rush Limbaugh called her a "sl*t" (he has since apologized). President Obama himself also made a personal call to Fluke thanking her for speaking about the concerns of American women and to "tell her parents that they should be proud of her."
In her testimony, Sandra Fluke stated that "conservative Catholic organizations have been asking: what did you expect when we enrolled at a Catholic school? We can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that impede our academic success."
Fluke needs to be reminded that schools and universities, religious or not, exist to promote academic success so that young people can be positive contributors to our society, be it in the field of medicine, technology, education, or research and development. Nowhere in any single school's platform or goal can it be found to encourage students be active participants in fulfilling the carnal desire of their communities.
Fluke may be an unabashed advocate for women's reproductive justice but sexual activities are NOT Constitution-guaranteed rights but are personal, private choices made by each individual. No one has the right to require his/her classmate, neighbor, pastors/priests or the American taxpayers to pay for their personal, recreational bedroom pleasures. A little common sense tells us that if you cannot afford to buy your own contraceptives, then please practice some self-control. Nobody dies from a celibate way of life. But the most sensible thing to do is to ask your partner to split the bill. After all, it takes two to tango and so it is with the cost of their own private escapades.
I was going to do the math and check the accuracy of Fluke's claim of $3000 per year costs of contraceptives but found this clever nugget from a certain Dennis Dev, posted on Facebook on March 2nd, 2012. This is what Mr. Dev had to say:
"Ok, so let me get this straight - Sandra Fluke says that she has so much sex that she can't afford the birth control because she is a college student and it is putting a strain on her budget and her social life at Georgetown University. She says birth control protection costs her $3000 per year, a whole summer's salary!
Ok, so why didn't anyone at the congressional hearing or in the media challenge that $3000 figure? Where's Bill O'Reilly when you need him? Why didn't Rush Limbaugh challenge this figure? Ok, I will!
According to Planned Parenthood, the pill costs between $15 and $50 per month, depending on type used. Let's see: that comes to between $180 and $600 per year - not even close to the $3000 figure. Is she lying or what?
So, what does Sandra Fluke use for birth control that costs $3000/yr? Oh, maybe it's condoms! Let's see, condoms at Walmart run $11 for a pack of 40 LifeStyles Ultra Sensitive condoms, and between $9 and $18 for a pack of 36 condoms, depending on brand. So, lets assume she buys the economy pack- 40 condoms at $11 per pack (why aren't the guys buying the condoms?). At $3000 per year, that's 272 boxes of condoms per year, or 10,880 condoms per year. Wow, is that a lot of sex or what?
If you do the math and divide 10,880 condoms/yr by 365 days/yr, she goes through 29.8 condoms per day (and guys - no one guy I know could do this), 365 days per year, and she wants us to believe that and pay her for it! When does she have time to go to school? And she and the media and the Dems are outraged by what Rush Limbaugh said about her? To top it all off, Obama calls her today and congratulates her and tell her that her parents should be very proud of her! Yea, right - I'm sure all of you would be very proud of your daughter if she did this and then publicly announced it and wanted others to pay for it. Give me a break!"
As amusing as Mr. Dev's take on Ms. Fluke's testimony, if it was ever humanly possible to be this sexually active, even the simplest elementary math cannot add up to a $3000 contraceptive costs that she claimed, unless, in her calculation, she also added the hidden costs of sometimes unintended consequence of sex - abortion. After all, when you are having this much fun, who wants to be punished with a baby? Sandra Fluke and her peers cannot be inconvenienced with an unplanned pregnancy. No wonder then that she finds support and encouragement from the most uncompromising abortion advocate-president in our nation's history.
It is unconscionable, if not downright twisted, for Fluke to lobby Georgetown University (which she is attending on her own free will) for free birth control coverage, which subsequently includes abortion, when abortion is an act that is very much against the core doctrine of the Jesuit faith.
It is also utterly deceitful of Sandra Fluke, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi who called her to testify, to frame her testimony as a fight for women's "reproductive rights" and "health issues" when we all are smart enough to know that the ultimate purpose of this hearing is to protect and advance the abortion cause. Because when babies are being aborted, what exactly are they "reproducing"? When doctors decry the use of simple laxative as a dieting tool, how is it promoting women's health when fetuses with beating hearts are purged out of their mothers' bodies with pills or through surgical procedure?
I was not part of the party-crazed crowd back when I was a college student. My parents paid for every bit of my education so I did what they expected me to do - hit the books. Now that I am a parent myself with a child in college, I am not so sure which is more frightening: (1) that we are raising a generation who feels entitled to other people's money and displays the outrageous audacity to demand that the American people pay for the cost and consequence of their actions in their "pursuit of happiness", or (2) our president, the leader of the free world, who openly applauds the likes of Sandra Fluke for exercising their reproductive rights but, with equal audacity, lays the financial responsibility and accountability of their personal, recreational choices on the laps of the taxpayers then demagogue the rich and our job-creators at every turn for "not doing their fair share."
If we as a people have not prayed for common sense in a long while, I think it's high time that we get down on our knees and ask, for the sake of our country's future stewards, for some serious divine awakening ... otherwise, as a nation, we're screwed.
Thanks for this great write up. It is both incisive and enlightening. Its a shame that the so called Leader of the free world would want his daughters to promote such a reckless sex lifestyle on a national scale. Then again, the desperation on their part propelled them to sweep under, the actual issue at stake by twisting a strong economic and moral issue to that of protection of women's rights. How clever and deceitful. Thanks Nancy for this wonderful piece.
ReplyDelete