Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   John Boehner (R) claims providing co-pay free birth control to women is unconstitutional   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 362
    More: Unlikely, Boehner, health insurance plans, birth control, places of worship, valid argument, Affordable Care Act, mandates, religious denomination  
•       •       •

8240 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2012 at 7:25 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



362 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-02-02 07:55:59 PM  

MarkEC: vernonFL: The Founding Fathers didnt support women voting, much less getting subsidized birth control.

You are absolutely right, that's why we now have the 19th amendment. Where is your subsidized birth control amendment?

It amazes me how people think the constitution should just be interpreted to allow new government controls over their lives. You want universal health care? Start the amendment process, that's what it's there for.

The founding fathers in their wisdom knew that the future would bring changes to society. That's why the amendment process is built into the constitution. Slavery was ended by the 13th amendment. Prohibition was established by the 18th amendment. Women got the right to vote by the 19th amendment. Prohibition was ended by the 21st amendment. Why do people today think that suddenly we can just interpret the constitution to mean new things instead of using the amendment process?


Amendments be hard to pass, yo.
 
2012-02-02 07:56:27 PM  
When are people going to get over their religious superstitions? The world will become a better place if they do.
 
2012-02-02 07:56:54 PM  

dancingsucks: The government cannot be everything for everybody. The bill will soon be coming due.


It can however be the government for everybody. Maybe you have a lisp, but "pithy" and "pissy" have two different meanings.
 
2012-02-02 07:58:28 PM  

thamike: vernonFL: Catholics believe that virgins can get pregnant, im not sure we should take their other views on human reproduction seriously.

[geek-news.mtv.com image 461x599]


www.turnbacktogod.com

Sup.
 
2012-02-02 07:58:40 PM  

alklloyd: More of Boner's special brand of "dickitry". Unsurprising.


It's funny because the guy's name is "Boner" if you take out one letter. Like "Count".
I have milk shooting out of my nose because it is so humorous.
 
2012-02-02 07:58:52 PM  

MarkEC: You are absolutely right, that's why we now have the 19th amendment. Where is your subsidized birth control amendment?

It amazes me how people think the constitution should just be interpreted to allow new government controls over their lives. You want universal health care? Start the amendment process, that's what it's there for.

The founding fathers in their wisdom knew that the future would bring changes to society. That's why the amendment process is built into the constitution. Slavery was ended by the 13th amendment. Prohibition was established by the 18th amendment. Women got the right to vote by the 19th amendment. Prohibition was ended by the 21st amendment. Why do people today think that suddenly we can just interpret the constitution to mean new things instead of using the amendment process?


What absolute nonsense. If we ran the country based on your view of the constitution there'd be no point in even having a Congress to pass laws because virtually everything they could do would come under fire as unconstitutional and require an amendment.
 
2012-02-02 07:59:06 PM  
The republicans don't want poor people to have birth control. They don't want them to have abortions. And they don't want to pay for welfare babies.

Do the math, idiots. Which one is cheapest?
 
2012-02-02 07:59:39 PM  

MarkEC: vernonFL: The Founding Fathers didnt support women voting, much less getting subsidized birth control.

You are absolutely right, that's why we now have the 19th amendment. Where is your subsidized birth control amendment?

It amazes me how people think the constitution should just be interpreted to allow new government controls over their lives. You want universal health care? Start the amendment process, that's what it's there for.

The founding fathers in their wisdom knew that the future would bring changes to society. That's why the amendment process is built into the constitution. Slavery was ended by the 13th amendment. Prohibition was established by the 18th amendment. Women got the right to vote by the 19th amendment. Prohibition was ended by the 21st amendment. Why do people today think that suddenly we can just interpret the constitution to mean new things instead of using the amendment process?


Actually i dont disagree with you. I think that these issues should, and will, go to the courts, eventually to the Supreme Court, and they will decide whether this is or isnt Constitutional.
 
2012-02-02 07:59:58 PM  

Spade: You don't "need" birth control. It's an elective thing.


Have you been in a WalMart lately? There are a lot of people who need birth control.
 
2012-02-02 08:00:07 PM  
You want to cover treatment for erectile disfunction?

Fine, cover birth control pills.
 
2012-02-02 08:00:31 PM  

moothemagiccow: ArkAngel: No, he's saying that forcing Catholic employers that employ or service non-Catholics to offer a service that violates their beliefs is unconstitutional. And I agree with him. Would you force a Muslim-owned restaurant to serve alcohol or force a Jewish deli to serve ham and cheese on rye?

Would you force waiters at the restaurant to abstain from pork because the only grocery store they can afford to shop at has a pact with the restaurant allowing their membership?

Sweet jesus, trying to condense that into one sentence shows what's wrong with american healthcare system. Your employer should not be involved with your healthcare, full stop.


If your employer is covering a chunk of the cost, yeah they should. I'm not going to write a blank check for you at restaurant without setting some ground rules on what you can order.
/not catholic
//think they're a bunch of nutjobs
 
2012-02-02 08:01:24 PM  

OgreMagi: The republicans don't want poor people to have birth control. They don't want them to have abortions. And they don't want to pay for welfare babies.

Do the math, idiots. Which one is cheapest?


Dunno, but I'm guessing privatized prisons and wars of aggression are most profitable...
 
2012-02-02 08:01:34 PM  

Cajnik: I'm not sure how putting the cost on the private insurance companies is going to make health care more affordable for everyone


Well, that's because you don't understand how large scale economies operate. Birth control is cheap, caring for millions of unwanted and unintentional pregnancies is not. The math is actually pretty simple.
 
2012-02-02 08:01:53 PM  

Cyno01: thamike: vernonFL: Catholics believe that virgins can get pregnant, im not sure we should take their other views on human reproduction seriously.

[geek-news.mtv.com image 461x599]

[www.turnbacktogod.com image 300x450]

Sup.


Sup?
 
2012-02-02 08:04:17 PM  
Its a really good thing that the non-faithful got all the tolerance the fundies left on the table.
 
2012-02-02 08:04:32 PM  

Spade: Also, why do only biatches get free stuff?

Do I get prostate cancer screenings co-pay free?


Yes you can, but there may be 2 hands on your shoulders while getting screened.
 
2012-02-02 08:04:32 PM  

misanthropic1: OgreMagi: The republicans don't want poor people to have birth control. They don't want them to have abortions. And they don't want to pay for welfare babies.

Do the math, idiots. Which one is cheapest?

Dunno, but I'm guessing privatized prisons and wars of aggression are most profitable...


Truly, we should imprison all women for the duration of their pregnancy, and then drop the newborns into combat first thing.

No more welfare babbys AND we get to keep our jobs!
 
2012-02-02 08:05:56 PM  

Splinshints: MarkEC: You are absolutely right, that's why we now have the 19th amendment. Where is your subsidized birth control amendment?

It amazes me how people think the constitution should just be interpreted to allow new government controls over their lives. You want universal health care? Start the amendment process, that's what it's there for.

The founding fathers in their wisdom knew that the future would bring changes to society. That's why the amendment process is built into the constitution. Slavery was ended by the 13th amendment. Prohibition was established by the 18th amendment. Women got the right to vote by the 19th amendment. Prohibition was ended by the 21st amendment. Why do people today think that suddenly we can just interpret the constitution to mean new things instead of using the amendment process?

What absolute nonsense. If we ran the country based on your view of the constitution there'd be no point in even having a Congress to pass laws because virtually everything they could do would come under fire as unconstitutional and require an amendment.


If we ran the country based on your apparent view, the constitution would be meaningless.
It isn't meaningless yet, but that's the direction we are headed.
 
2012-02-02 08:06:13 PM  

thamike: dancingsucks: The government cannot be everything for everybody. The bill will soon be coming due.

It can however be the government for everybody. Maybe you have a lisp, but "pithy" and "pissy" have two different meanings.


It is the government of everbody but as we reach the tipping point of more people taking from the government then paying taxes we become an oversized Greece.
 
2012-02-02 08:06:54 PM  
Do Catholics still believe in transsubstantiation? Should we respect their views on that?
 
2012-02-02 08:07:33 PM  

dancingsucks: thamike: dancingsucks: The government cannot be everything for everybody. The bill will soon be coming due.

It can however be the government for everybody. Maybe you have a lisp, but "pithy" and "pissy" have two different meanings.

It is the government of everbody but as we reach the tipping point of more people taking from the government then paying taxes we become an oversized Greece.


I honestly have no idea where you are headed with this.
 
2012-02-02 08:08:02 PM  

Madame Psychosis: Spade: You don't "need" birth control. It's an elective thing.

Have you been in a WalMart lately? There are a lot of people who need birth control.


Those people?

They need either forced abortions or sterlizations.
 
2012-02-02 08:08:23 PM  
Next you will be telling me that devout beaners are just having anchor babies.

Make up your mind!
 
2012-02-02 08:08:29 PM  

Yogimus: He is not incorrect. You may oppose his view point, but the stance he is taking is NOT incorrect.


Exactly. I believe that his claim is 100% factually true. Boehner has claimed that "I think this mandate violates our constitution." He is not claiming that the mandate violates the constitution. He is claiming that he thinks the mandate violates the constitution. And, Boehner has demonstrated that he's capable of believing all sorts of stupid things without confirmation. There's no reason to think that he's lying about his own stupidity now.

Similarly, if I claim that I think the earth is hollow and populated by lizard people who secretly control the world, I may be making a factually true statement. I am claiming that I think something is true, and I just may be stupid enough to believe things that are demonstrably wrong.
 
2012-02-02 08:09:05 PM  
I didnt read anything in the constitution that says the fed government is supposed to provide anything to anyone, outside of national security, economy, and the most basic framework of our society.

The fed government was never intended to provide food, shelter, medical care or much else to anyone.

So he's correct.
 
2012-02-02 08:09:17 PM  

Spade: Also, why do only biatches get free stuff?

Do I get prostate cancer screenings co-pay free?


Under the HCA, yes you do.
 
2012-02-02 08:09:46 PM  

Wook: AverageAmericanGuy: This is precisely why medical care should be socialized. The government would be completely free to dispense this kind of care or free and fully within the bounds of he Constitution.

I agree with you if I don't have to pay for it. And where is abortion mentioned in the constitution?


Hey allstar...what do you think costs you more...couple bucks in birth control, or thirty years of welfare payments?

...'merica
 
2012-02-02 08:10:24 PM  

thamike: dancingsucks: thamike: dancingsucks: The government cannot be everything for everybody. The bill will soon be coming due.

It can however be the government for everybody. Maybe you have a lisp, but "pithy" and "pissy" have two different meanings.

It is the government of everbody but as we reach the tipping point of more people taking from the government then paying taxes we become an oversized Greece.

I honestly have no idea where you are headed with this.


Then look at a few GDP to deficit graphs. If you need them explained I can help.
 
2012-02-02 08:10:31 PM  
I'm convinced that most republicans think the Constitution is equivalent to the Doctor's psychic paper.
 
2012-02-02 08:10:49 PM  

vernonFL: Do Catholics still believe in transsubstantiation? Should we respect their views on that?


It doesn't really hurt anybody. Now, reverse transsubstantiation...That's another story. I believe there are restrictions. Especially Sundays.
 
2012-02-02 08:11:47 PM  

ArkAngel: No, he's saying that forcing Catholic employers that employ or service non-Catholics to offer a service that violates their beliefs is unconstitutional.


How, exactly? Please cite specific sections of the constitution and supporting case law.
 
2012-02-02 08:11:48 PM  
Forcing men to pay for womens health care is not justified for the following reasons. Men do not have to visit the oby/gyn and therefore should not have to pay for one. men's regular doctor visits are less frequent and less expensive. most medical expenses are acrued during the end of life and therefore women cost more than men because they live almost 6 years longer than men (last time i checked anyway). If men are forced to pay the same as women in health insurance, then women should be forced to pay the same as men in car insurance. no descrimination works both ways.

but women NEED this extra health care to stay healthy you say? well i NEED about 1000 more calories per day than an average woman to stay healthy. therefore, by the same arguement, women should be forced to subsidize my food. i should pay less for my food, and women should pay more for theirs to make up the difference. that would be fair.
 
2012-02-02 08:12:06 PM  
If the only choice to provide a Constitutionally compliant health plan to sufficiently cover the wishes of subscribers is for it to be Government run, I would suggest that such a health plan, even if Constitutionally compliant, is NOT Constitutionally required. There is huge market (possibly National if the libs get out of the way) to allow customers the right to chose a program that satisfies them without undue regulation or Federal oversight.
 
2012-02-02 08:12:23 PM  

dancingsucks: Then look at a few GDP to deficit graphs. If you need them explained I can help.


Maybe if you just clarified what your overall point was...
 
2012-02-02 08:13:01 PM  
DNTRFA, but I assume they have religious issues.

If there really is a god, doesn't he have more to concentrate on than what people do with their tingly parts? I'm pretty pretty sure he's more worried about how bad Tim Tebow is going to suck next season.
 
2012-02-02 08:13:27 PM  

OgreMagi: The republicans don't want poor people to have birth control. They don't want them to have abortions. And they don't want to pay for welfare babies.

Do the math, idiots. Which one is cheapest?


Sterilization.

But that's "inappropriate".

Until there is a fetus that needs killing. THEN it's "appropriate".
 
2012-02-02 08:13:28 PM  

TheMadChaosopher: I didnt read anything in the constitution that says the fed government is supposed to provide anything to anyone, outside of national security, economy, and the most basic framework of our society.

The fed government was never intended to provide food, shelter, medical care or much else to anyone.

So he's correct.


What was the federal government intended for?
 
2012-02-02 08:14:52 PM  

thamike: dancingsucks: Then look at a few GDP to deficit graphs. If you need them explained I can help.

Maybe if you just clarified what your overall point was...

The government cannot be everything for everybody. It is quite simple.
 
2012-02-02 08:14:56 PM  

MarkEC: It amazes me how people think the constitution should just be interpreted to allow new government controls over their lives. You want universal health care? Start the amendment process, that's what it's there for.


It amazes me how people who whine about constitutionality fail to understand the fact that the constitution does not have to specifically allow the government to do things. You don't need a health care amendment as long as universal health care does not violate the limits already set in place by the constitution.
 
2012-02-02 08:15:17 PM  

Hagenhatesyouall: Until there is a fetus that needs killing. THEN it's "appropriate".


I take it you're still kind of upset over being partially aborted.
 
2012-02-02 08:15:50 PM  

Spade: Yogimus: Spade: Also, why do only biatches get free stuff?

Do I get prostate cancer screenings co-pay free?

Better yet, how come I don't get to decide if she keeps the baby? After all, I have to pay for it. Can I opt out of childcare payments?

This too. A woman can just opt out of having the kid without any input from the guy.
Or decide to keep it. We deserve input in this if we have to pay for it.


You do have input, pray harder.
 
2012-02-02 08:17:19 PM  

dancingsucks: thamike: dancingsucks: Then look at a few GDP to deficit graphs. If you need them explained I can help.

Maybe if you just clarified what your overall point was...
The government cannot be everything for everybody. It is quite simple.


Yes, but for some reason, you're under the impression that repeating that statement is brilliant and unique.
 
2012-02-02 08:17:28 PM  

thamike: vernonFL: Catholics believe that virgins can get pregnant, im not sure we should take their other views on human reproduction seriously.

[geek-news.mtv.com image 461x599]


It's pretty simple. He is calling into question Catholics' ability to reason.
 
2012-02-02 08:17:44 PM  
Can anyone explain to me why Republicans think that opposing birth control is a good policy?

Did they run some sort of poll or focus group that told them they would get more contributions and votes this way? Do they really expect people to say "Well, shucks, I hate birth control too. I'm gonna give money to Boehner in the next election!" Or why have so many of those yahoos decided to come out with this complete nonsense lately?
 
2012-02-02 08:18:22 PM  
Boehner doesn't want ABS or BC. Where does the grist for the profit mill come from if not from poor, uneducated population? You think these moralistic farks want their kids in war? Working factories and slaughterhouses? These unborn children aren't souls they give a shiat about. They are grist for the mill and their children's future constituents.
 
2012-02-02 08:19:09 PM  

thamike: dancingsucks: thamike: dancingsucks: Then look at a few GDP to deficit graphs. If you need them explained I can help.

Maybe if you just clarified what your overall point was...
The government cannot be everything for everybody. It is quite simple.

Yes, but for some reason, you're under the impression that repeating that statement is brilliant and unique.

I refuse to attack an unarmed man!
 
2012-02-02 08:19:54 PM  

greyw1980: Spade: Yogimus: Spade: Also, why do only biatches get free stuff?

Do I get prostate cancer screenings co-pay free?

Better yet, how come I don't get to decide if she keeps the baby? After all, I have to pay for it. Can I opt out of childcare payments?

This too. A woman can just opt out of having the kid without any input from the guy.
Or decide to keep it. We deserve input in this if we have to pay for it.

You do have input, pray harder.


I thought the man's input had already been supplied. Hence, the pregnancy.
 
2012-02-02 08:20:40 PM  

Spade: It also forces homosexual couples, who certainly don't need birth control, to pay for it as well.

You don't "need" birth control. It's an elective thing.


And you don't "need" sex. It's an elective thing.

Some women do need those pills to treat things like endometriosis, irregular menstrual periods, and hirsutism, including my own sis and a couple of my friends (endometriosis is pretty common in 40-somethings, I guess).
 
2012-02-02 08:21:49 PM  

Spade: You don't "need" birth control. It's an elective thing.


So is Viagra, but that's covered by many insurance companies.
 
2012-02-02 08:22:25 PM  
Santa Clause aint constitutional but hes still around

fc02.deviantart.net
 
Displayed 50 of 362 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report