Sane rants on an insane world. Read at your own risk. Don't blame me if your head explodes.
In Kalifornistan, maybe.
They do tend to give us their loudest, most obnoxious specimens of the Toxic Left Wing Moonbat...you may have a point.
This ISSUE over the petty cost of birth control is out of control!PAY ME PENNIES NOW (FOR BIRTH CONTROL) OR PAY ME LATER FOR THE IMMENSE COST OF RAISING A CHILD.......
OCM--it's not about the birth control. I don't care what she wants me to pay for for her. I do not want to support perpetual adolescence. Does that mean I'd cut off welfare and foodstamps? Absolutely--for anyone who's under the age of about 65, physically capable of working, has an IQ of above room temperature, and is not so insane that they think they're a turnip, or some such. And yes--I'd cut able-bodied parents off, too. If they choose not to work and feed their kids, they can lose their kids.Does that mean I'd cut off medicaid for single, pregnant women? As soon as their doctor had cleared them at their six week post postpartum checkup (if they get cleared at the six week checkup--some aren't cleared for a while longer, depending). Would I cut off the kids? No. They'll get cut off at 18 or so, anyway. It's not about the birth control. I do not want to be responsible for anyone other than myself, my husband, and my children.
The entire issue is called FRINGE BENEFITS and they come in all shapes and sizes.If you eliminate one for whatever reason, then eliminate all FRINGE BENEFITS!
OCM--I'd rather have the extra pay that would otherwise be spent on "Fringe Benefits." They go back to the '30s, when FDR created caps to prevent offering higher pay to lure workers away from protected (by him) businesses that wouldn't pay more. So, some companies started taking that extra money that they couldn't offer workers, and started offering things like health insurance in lieu of more pay. As for Fluke wanting the "fringe benefits" of multi-thousand-dollar birth control...well, most insurance does not offer coverage for contraception. Specifically excludes it, in fact. That she wants to force a Catholic university to act against its stated faith is childish, stupid, and wrong.As for "fringe benefits"...the "fringe benefit" of infringing on the first amendment in this instance carries the added benefit for the government of being able to censor our speech (and prosecute us for speaking out), and restrict where and how and why we can assemble. So, yeah: I am very against Fluke's stance. No, I don't want to pay for other people's health insurance/medications/recreation.