I miss making fun of Sharkansky, so here’s some nonsense that took me about 30 seconds of Googling to find that it isn’t correct.
The Seattle Times Nicole Brodeur’s column today is thoroughly hysterical — in all three senses of the word — “Politics again playing tough with women’s bodies”
It’s 2012, and the battle for control of the American uterus rages on …[Rush Limbaugh] reignited a new national debate about how women can maintain ownership of, and responsibility for, their own bodies.
Of course, neither Limbaugh nor anybody else of consequence is advocating that government restrict access to contraceptives, as Brodeur implies.
First, if you can’t get contraceptives because they’re priced out or unavailable on religious grounds, that’s the access to them restricted, even if it’s not the government restricting them. But second, and to the point he’s trying to make here’s Rick Santorum, winner of the second most GOP contests for president this year, on birth control:
One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.
Anyway, I was just going to make fun of that, but what the hell, I’m already here. Let’s make fun of the rest of Sharkansky’s word salad.
Brodeur’s central premise is that women can “maintain ownership of, and responsibility for, their own bodies” only if the federal government forces third parties to provide free birth control supplies.
The government forces third parties to do all sorts of things. I’d prefer universal single payer, but this improves the current system that in many instances means people who might want to use birth control don’t have that choice.
How is this different from the proposition that people can’t take responsibility for brushing their own teeth and wiping their own rear ends without a federally-mandated supply of free toothpaste and toilet paper?
Who the hell gets priced out of toilet paper and toothpaste? If brushing your teeth or wiping your rear end* cost in the order of magnitude that prescription medicines like birth control, then we’d need a more equatable way to distribute them in society. It would be bad for the people who couldn’t wipe their butts, of course, but it would also be bad for society to have lots of shit covered asses around stinky and unhealthy. That would be one solution, I guess.
God this is a stupid metaphor, but pressing on. If 58% of people who used toothpaste used it for reasons other than (although sometimes including) dental hygiene then it would probably also be more important that society make sure it was available to everyone.
* Rear end? Are you 5?
Maybe someone should explain to him that when he goes to the store and buys tooth paste there is an entire police department who have his back and will force them to give him the tooth paste he pays for.
Students pay $1800 a year for health insurance at Georgetown. Too bad for the women that it doesn’t actually cover their health care needs.
No one’s forcing anyone to provide free any thing. B/C pills would still have to be paid for, they’d just cost less. Plus, birth control pills reduce expensive things like missed work, varian cysts and babies.
Damn that big government going around and bring down employers costs!
Not sure what a varian cyst is. That should read ovarian cysts…
“Rear end? Are you 5?”
No, but remember, her readers are.
Sadly, there are in fact people who can’t afford toothpaste and toilet paper. Here in the Olympia area, “The Other Bank” (ie, not the Food Bank) is a charity which collects such things for distribution.
Hey guys, can we try to stay on topic? I know I’ve been bad at policing it recently, but I had to delete a ton of stuff this morning. There’s an open thread not too far down.
The angry white men who make up the “base” of the Republican Party have really stepped in it this time. What is worse (for them) is they don’t seem to quite realize just how bad they’ve stepped in it.
While as a yellow dog democrat I’m glad this will likely lead to the re-election of President Obama and hope it pulls the down-ballot races enough our way to re-take the house and keep the Senate (not to mention hopefully electing Rep. Inslee for governor). I do believe the US (and Washington State) needs two sane political parties. If nothing else a loyal opposition keeps the Democrats honest and from indulging in their worst excesses.
Goldy nailed the Health Care vs Warfare and what Catholic and Quaker taxpayers have no choice in, yesterday at Slog.
But it’s even simpler than that:
It’s prescription coverage.
What a doctor prescribes and a person chooses to take are NO ONE ELSE’S BUSINESS.
What about Christian Scientist pharmacists who are morally opposed to all medications? What a simple gig that would be.
@7 Yes, too far down. If you don’t want your closed threads being used as litter baskets, then post an open thread every day. Every third thread should be an open thread, because that’s as far down as anyone reads.