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.

(MLive.com)   Despite the ability to "shut that whole thing down," Republicans propose women buy rape insurance   (mlive.com) divider line 76
    More: Sick, Republicans, Whitmer, Michigan Legislature, Rick Snyder, Party leaders of the United States Senate  
•       •       •

4884 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Dec 2013 at 10:27 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-12-03 11:00:22 AM  
8 votes:
www.bartcop.com
2013-12-03 10:35:02 AM  
6 votes:

I_C_Weener: whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.

I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.


Your car isn't human, and doesn't get psychological damage from a flat tire. It doesn't sleep in terror of you if you drive it over a nail.

Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really. I say we see their point, rather than quibble over the semantics of it, and alter the plan accordingly.
2013-12-03 10:39:32 AM  
5 votes:

lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.


Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.
2013-12-03 10:50:05 AM  
4 votes:
FTA: The nonprofit has scheduled a press conference for Tuesday morning at the Michigan Capitol that will feature "sexual assault victims and individuals conceived in rape" who represent Save the 1, a national group that argues against exceptions in abortion policies.

This makes absolutely no sense.  They are alive because their mothers chose to keep them, not because abortion wasn't an option, so making abortion illegal in the case of rape wouldn't have made a difference.  They credit their relative success with simply being born, but ignore the fact that they were born to a woman who made the choice to keep them.

If anything, this position is more in line with legalizing rape than outlawing abortion.  They can't say "I wouldn't be alive if my mother had been allowed to get an abortion", because they were allowed to get abortions, they just didn't.  They can only say "I wouldn't be alive if my mother had been allowed to say 'no'."
2013-12-03 10:35:38 AM  
4 votes:

serial_crusher: Well, that's a stretch. Abortion == rape now, apparently. Sounds to me like somebody's trying too hard.


An abortion is a service rape victims might utilize to minimize the negative long-term impacts of rape that costs money.  Buying insurance that covers abortions in the case that women get raped could be accurately termed "rape insurance."  Removing abortions from insurance means women who are raped do not have coverage to help pay for an abortion.  They will indeed then need to purchase additional insurance.

Your analogy sucks.  Just like car insurance doesn't prevent accidents, you would never say "fixing your car == car accident."
2013-12-03 10:29:58 AM  
4 votes:

I_C_Weener: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

I didn't say it wasn't stupid.  I said it isn't rape insurance.


True.

However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance. 

It's a slightly hyperbolic term, but it only works because there's a large amount of truth behind it.
2013-12-03 10:11:15 AM  
4 votes:

I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.


It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.
2013-12-03 03:17:28 PM  
3 votes:

dywed88: The key to the rape exception is that the woman did not chose to have sex, so her rights personal health and security is a relevant concern. Effectively a woman then has the right to self defense.


Self defense against the fetus? The fetus didn't rape her.  The exemption is a moral contortion that allows people to sidestep their belief that it's okay to kill children of rapists, but other children are off the table.
2013-12-03 11:43:39 AM  
3 votes:

The My Little Pony Killer: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.

Consistency across the board still doesn't make them anything more than busybodies.


The only pro-lifer I've ever met who wasn't an asshole about it is my old buddy Jeff. Jeff is a Catholic who thinks that women should have easy access to free birth control, because the best way to prevent abortions is to make sure women don't get pregnant in the first place. He also thinks that ALL abortions are wrong because if abortion is murder, it's ALWAYS murder. That being said, he knows that banning abortion won't prevent abortion, it'll just make abortions unsafe. So he thinks that abortion should remain legal because legalized abortion saves women's lives. So he's actually pro-life in that he wants to support ALL life, not just unborn fetuses. He also thinks we should have single payer insurance that automatically covers everyone in the US, because he's actually pro-life.
2013-12-03 11:09:23 AM  
3 votes:
I love Republicans.  I can't think of ANY circumstance where mentioning rape in any context has turned out well for them.  Yet they consistently feel the need to do it every few months, apparently in some grand quest to be the first political party with absolutely zero female votes in an election.

//rape insurance?  seriously?
2013-12-03 08:46:40 AM  
3 votes:
Proposing it is an amazing dick move.  Following one dick move with another doesn't make sense.

Perhaps proposing a law making it the responsibility of the rapist to pay for any and all costs would make more sense.  Said perp has no means to pay?  He's doing time and working until he's paid back the state for the costs they covered.  Of course, that sort of thing might amount to slave labor.  Making someone work for no or little pay is far, far worse than rape...because money.  Go ahead and rape money and see what happens to you.
2013-12-03 08:44:06 AM  
3 votes:
This whole rape thing is great for raping women but what if I told you we could profit from it too?
2013-12-03 12:44:56 PM  
2 votes:
The idea behind health insurance was not pick and choose procedures.
2013-12-03 12:14:16 PM  
2 votes:
Dear policyholder,

We regret to inform you that your recent claim filed under your rape insurance policy (#█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ -█ █ █ █ ) has been deemed ineligible for coverage, after review of the case by our expert team of adjusters.

Per the terms of your policy, you may opt to submit a disputation of this judgement to a third party mediator of our choosing.  The terms of the mediated arbitration are binding and final, and are subject to the laws of the state of appropriate jurisdiction.

Statistical analysis of claims for rape insurance indicate that over 50% are deemed ineligible for a claim, for a variety of reasons. We suggest that you contact your broker to discuss improving your coverage by adding a slut insurance policy.  Information on slut insurance is also available on our website, www.█ █ █ █ █ █ █ .com.
2013-12-03 12:01:23 PM  
2 votes:

whistleridge: mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 650x475]

Lol. I never would have noticed if you hadn't said anything.

Um...at least she doesn't have a camel toe? In fact, she appears to have undergone Type III excision.


Or more likely has a trimmed panty liner who's outline was photoshopped out in post production.  Don't want to show any contours there - that would be smut and you can't have that in an ad.  Same with body hair - shaved shaved shaved is the rule.  In any commercial photo, assume it's 'shopped extensively.  Also assume the "package" being held by men's underwear in ads is a "tastefully" positioned foam tube.  But no ball hang.  That's nasty.  The only way you achieve the men's underwear ad "look" is by wearing a slightly undersized speedo of the appropriate color and creating the contours with a "mock cock".
2013-12-03 11:54:50 AM  
2 votes:

parasol: The GOP has been actively working to deny women birth control. This has been the "insurance to cover for unplanned events" women have used for quite some time (let us say the 70's for Fark sake)


Exactly.

We have "rape insurance." It's called birth control pills and Plan B. But the GOP has been trying to restrict access to birth control and Plan B, because reasons. So they remove a woman's ability to easily get pregnancy prevention medicine and then the GOP turns around and makes it even more difficult to get an abortion. It's not about preventing abortion. If it was, the GOP would be handing out birth control pills like candy. It's really about controlling women.

We won't let you get birth control.
We won't let you get an abortion.
And we sure as hell won't help you pay for that kid you accidentally made.
2013-12-03 11:36:54 AM  
2 votes:
Surface Tension & neversubmit win 4 life.
2013-12-03 11:11:45 AM  
2 votes:
So if a women is raped and doesn't get pregnant is she still covered? There are lots of expenses associated with rape even if she isn't pregnant. Does that mean she has to keep getting raped until she is pregnant so she can be covered. I'm so confused. Why don't we like women?
2013-12-03 10:49:02 AM  
2 votes:

I_C_Weener: It isn't semantics when you accuse a man or murder vs. self-defense.  Same thing here.  This isn't about rape coverage.  Its about abortion coverage...all abortion coverage.   Quit making me think you are hysterical when you want to focus on the evil buzz words thinking the audience won't pay attention to see its actually a bit more than just rape coverage.


Technically, it's 'about' how to pay for abortions in the instance of rape. But you're right; it's really 'about' all abortion coverage.

But why stop there? Let's be honest and go a few steps further. In that sense, it's REALLY 'about' control of women, which is in turn REALLY 'about' old rich white men being terrified that they might no longer have a monopoly on power in this country, so they're quite literally using every trick in the book to try and restrict the power of others so that they might retain said monopoly a little longer.

I can do slippery slopes too. Let's just stick to the topic at hand, hm?
2013-12-03 10:49:00 AM  
2 votes:
I've got it! Let's have insurance providers cover women's contraception and strongly encourage people to use it. Then we don't have to worry so much about abortion being used outside of cases of rape or medical necessity. A simple, common sense solution that everyone can get on board with.
2013-12-03 10:39:35 AM  
2 votes:

I_C_Weener: True. But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy. But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity. I don't understand their reasoning.


Tubal ligation is far more involved than a vasectomy.  It's a proper surgery whereas a vasectomy is pretty much a local anaesthetic/outpatient deal with little risk of serious complication.
2013-12-03 09:26:13 AM  
2 votes:
How about if you all come up with 'Republican' insurance? Next time the GOP are elected, the insurance companies have to pay out. Don't know what the premiums would be, but it might be worth it.

/dumb idea of the week
2013-12-03 09:05:27 AM  
2 votes:
We hate Muslims! So, let's treat our women like Muslims treat theirs! GREAT IDEA!

I have always tried to see the better side of humanity, but quite honestly, eugenics is looking more and more appealing as a solution. One could say it's the.....final solution.
2013-12-04 09:22:28 AM  
1 votes:

demaL-demaL-yeH: pdee: The one question the pro-choice crowed has to avoid is when does a fetus become a person.  If you sink to the then the fundies will claim the high moral ground.

First breath, see:
וייצר יהוה אלהים את האדם עפר מן האדמה ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים ויהי האדם לנפש חיה׃

Because God says so.
Any other questions?


Not only can't I read that, I can't even make a guess to what language it is.   But I would like to know.   Would you please give the best guess English translation and the verse in the Bible for it?  (I say best guess because I know stuff is always lost in translation.  I regret I can't read it in it's original format.)

I have never heard the breath stance presented before and would love to know more about it.  This is as exciting as the time I found out 'thou shall not kill' is more closely translated to 'thou shall not murder' which is a huge difference.
2013-12-04 05:43:21 AM  
1 votes:
I see my responses have basically been taken care of for me and there is not much I need to say then(but I am going to blab because I can).  I will just say yes I am fine with abortion up until birth.  I know many are not, but I am.

I am not like so many people who are pro-choice yet abortion apologists.  Abortion does not require an apology.  This whole "I also hate abortion but I think women should have the right anyhow" is a proven loosing argument in the court of public opinion.  Stop conceding that there is anything wrong with abortion, because there is not.  DO correct people's mischaracterizations of what is occurring scientifically and medically during pregnancy and abortion.  Stop being afraid to offend these people and stop giving them ground.  Laugh at their emotional appeals and face them straight on with facts.  Do not let them refer to anything as a baby nor a child that is neither.

One other funny thing though that the right wingers don't process - abortions inevitably save TONS of taxpayer dollars.  Simple statistics (on who generally gets abortions) tells us that nearly all those no longer aborted zygotes/fetuses/etc (who do eventually become babies and later children) will come out of low or no income mothers so you have both more welfare moms and more kids in state custody until they get adopted (and most won't).

Statistics also tell us that most of these unadopted children end up spending the majority of their adult lives in prison (aka still being housed and fed by the taxpayer).  It is almost as if the state does not make a good loving and nurturing parent.  To add insult to injury these people are generally the same people that stand in the way of those kids getting adopted (thus having a real chance) by loving gay parents.

So in multiple compound ways, these "pro-life" assholes are basically asking to get taxed more but they will complain about it all the way to the bank.  They do not seem to think that THEIR OWN choices (aka the legislation they keep pushing) should have consequences.

And they want to talk about those "sluts" needing to "be responsible for their mistakes."  Well there is nothing wrong with having sex but yes failing to use birth control when you are not ready for a baby is a tad irresponsible yet completely understandable.  Still having a child you cannot afford (meaning you will have it only to shift the cost onto others) just because you made a tiny mistake earlier... is NOT "being responsible."  When you make a mess... the responsible thing to do is to clean up the mess.  So you screwed up and got pregnant... take care of the problem instead of asking the rest of us to pay for your mistakes for the next 18 years.

So get that abortion and go to college classes instead of Lamaze classes.  Do not write off your own future so that you can become a mother before you are ready.  Make something of yourself first and when you do eventually have children... they will have a life worth living and a real future to boot.  Now THAT is accepting responsibility!

And no abortions are not treated quite like condoms either.  Very few people get repeat abortions.  I cannot speak for everywhere, but around here they cost about $500 (I have personally brought friends since they cannot drive themselves home after) and the girls are gonna feel it for a while after depending on how far along she was.  I think most would find condoms/birth control pills to be much more attractive options after having got an abortion just once.
2013-12-03 07:46:58 PM  
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: So everyone arguing this is a rape bill are simultaneously saying that abortion only occurs because of rape?  No other reasons for abortion?  NONE?  REALLY?


How about those of us who are arguing that somebody else's medical decisions are nunya bidness?

Because it's not your body.
Because it's not your uterus.
Because it's not your life, health and wellbeing on the line.
Because God says that life begins at first breath, that causing a miscarriage is not murder, and created a trial by ordeal for adultery.
(Which, until it was banned by the Sanhedrin, included making the woman undergoing the trial drink an abortifacient (wormwood), according to contemporary documents.)
Because involuntary servitude is explicitly unconstitutional.
Because you don't get to impose the practices and beliefs of your religion on other people.
2013-12-03 05:10:40 PM  
1 votes:

sobriquet by any other name: evenserial_crusher: Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: dywed88: The key to the rape exception is that the woman did not chose to have sex, so her rights personal health and security is a relevant concern. Effectively a woman then has the right to self defense.

Self defense against the fetus? The fetus didn't rape her.  The exemption is a moral contortion that allows people to sidestep their belief that it's okay to kill children of rapists, but other children are off the table.

It's not that the fetus is being punished for raping her. She can't go back and kill the actual rapist after the fact and call it self defense either.
She's defending herself against the fetus's unsolicited use of her body for its life support functions.
If you choose to have sex, you're soliciting for a baby.
The fetus is as much a victim in that situation as the mother is, but the rapist is the one who should be charged with both rape and murder.

even more, why not also charge that guy with murder of the baby the woman  would have had if her resources were not drained raising the first? If we are going to follow that logic, that is.


Side note, not a direct response to what I'm quoting:
Whoever suggested that an abortion would not be done in self-defense against a fetus has never heard of eclampsia.

Pregnancies can be very dangerous. See the lawsuit that a woman is now pursuing against the Catholic bishops organization in the US because they did not inform her than an abortion would be the safest way to end a pregnancy that was already in the process of miscarrying. By doing so, they exposed her to the possibility of severe infection and other issues. I am SO glad to see this lawsuit, because we really need to have this conversation. Quantity of life is not sacred! Quality of life is.
2013-12-03 05:08:55 PM  
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: So everyone arguing this is a rape bill are simultaneously saying that abortion only occurs because of rape? No other reasons for abortion? NONE? REALLY?


The Republicans were given the chance to carve out an exception for rape victims.  Even the Republican governor of Michigan thought this went too far.  They specifically chose to leave rape victims not covered.  It was a choice, not an oversight.

That's why the name fits.
2013-12-03 04:37:38 PM  
1 votes:

pdee: A baby is just a lump of dividing cells unless you put forth some other distinction.  However that is not a road you want to go down.  If you do you are walking right into the argument the fundies want to have.  They will show you pictures of tiny fetuses and point out when the various parts start to develop and claim 'it's a child and you are murdering it'.The one question the pro-choice crowed has to avoid is when does a fetus become a person.  If you sink to the then the fundies will claim the high moral ground.


Actually, that's a surprisingly easy conversation. The line of distinction is breath. Even the bible says so.

/which puts their limit for abortion at 40+ weeks. That becomes a very fun conversation in a hurry.
2013-12-03 03:28:11 PM  
1 votes:

dywed88: In cases other than rape, the woman consented to have the child the moment she let a penis enter her. So her rights are now irrelevant.


Consent does not work that way.  You can only consent to an activity, not an unintended consequence of the activity.  Otherwise no one would be able to sue for medical malpractice.
2013-12-03 03:13:29 PM  
1 votes:

dywed88: In cases other than rape, the woman consented to have the child the moment she let a penis enter her. So her rights are now irrelevant.


I say not.  She still has those rights.  Under what basis does a clump of dividing cells have rights?  Let alone more rights than the mother?

We should be giving rights to bacteria next.  Or if that "sacred" human DNA (yet DNA that is > 99% identical is not sacred) is the dividing line, then we should consider the rights of malignant cancer stem cells.

The "pro-life" (as if most of those people should be allowed to call themselves that) movement has no argument but cheap appeals to emotion rather than appeals to logic.
2013-12-03 03:08:46 PM  
1 votes:

dywed88: In cases other than rape, the woman consented to have the child the moment she let a penis enter her. So her rights are now irrelevant.


Do you also do a stand up routine, cause that shiat's funny.
2013-12-03 03:01:25 PM  
1 votes:

sabreWulf07: formerfloozy: My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal.

WTF?


Sorry, I sould have said "my now ex-husband"
2013-12-03 02:06:54 PM  
1 votes:

formerfloozy: My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal.


WTF?
2013-12-03 01:36:23 PM  
1 votes:

Pinner: jst3p: It amazes me how many women still vote for them, it is pretty sad.


Because their men tell them to.
It's the sammich voting block.


Certainly this does happen pretty often, but it is sexist of you to assume that all women who vote Republican do so because their husbands commanded them.  You cannot fairly paint them all with such a wide brush.  I will have you know that many modern Conservative women vote that way because they are are stupid, gullible, self-loathing, and/or insane.

Plus you do have cases of men voting as they are commanded by their wives.
newsbusters.org
2013-12-03 01:03:59 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Sure. Stupid law proposed by GOP is stupid. I guess we wouldn't have much of a thread if some people weren't trying to pretend the response wasn't bullshiat. Drew loves him some cheer leading ninnies


We wouldn't have much of a thread if some ninnies didn't spend their time trying to distract from the main idea by nitpicking syntax, either.
2013-12-03 01:00:47 PM  
1 votes:

tarthrin: What I don't understand and what really ticks me off, is how can this tiny sliver of the Michigan population have this much influence.

I understand if you have enough signatures that the legislature would have to take a look at your suggestion and/or consider it, but to make it so that it also bypasses the governor completely is just insane.

That's less than 3% of our population and somehow that's enough to say its the people's will?


There are almost 10 million people in MI - 3% of that is 300k people. Probably not big enough for a truly representative sample (unless your selection was truly random, and not taken from a population of self-selected moralistic busybodies; and even then), but not insignificant.

In VA, I think you only need 30k signatures on a petition to run for president. The remedy against having batshiat crazy laws is that the same 3% of the population can wildly misrepresent the whole, which is why we have elections and referenda - if 97% of the people vote against, you've conclusively shown that that 3% really is out of touch. If another 47.0001% sign on with that 3%, then they did represent the whole (and the whole might be a bunch of moralistic busybodies in the aggregate, leaving the Courts to decouple the legal parts of the policy from the part that was legislated from the pulpit).

Put another way, if "only" 3% of people put forth a petition opposing murder, would we say it's not representative? That's just a legal threshhold, and making it higher could serve as a barrier for important legislation (it's hard to find 300k people willing to sign anything, especially if they have to give a name, e-mail address and/or phone number). We in other states with fewer moralistic busybodies (or in those states that respect all parts of the doctor-patient relationship and HIPAA) may disagree, but "Democracy is messy."

// especially when some asshole goes and re-mixes religion with politics after some breech-wearing businessmen made damn sure to filter that shiat out
2013-12-03 01:00:45 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: Headso: skullkrusher: Snatch Bandergrip: skullkrusher: All may be true but I suppose you see why she was being a dumbass?

I can concede that labeling unplanned pregnancy insurance as rape insurance is hyperbolic.

But given Republican ambivalence to rape, and an unsettling drive to control and regulate women's reproductive health, can one really be judged for drawing that conclusion?

Yeah. Republican stupidity doesn't justify Democratic stupidity. The law is absurd on its face, it is contrary to everything the GOP pretends to stand for in terms of small government and business regulation and places an unnecessary burden on private commerce. I know! let's call it rape insurance to help deflect from the fact that the law is a piece of shiat!

And by the time you are done explaining why the law is idiotic everyone you are talking to has tuned you out, calling it rape insurance gets people's attention. "conservatives" are always very concerned about democrats not taking the high road for some reason.

"Liberals" are never concerned about their own stupidity... Unless they're squawking about how they condemn the stupid. Drive them out. Marginalize! When they're not breathlessly defending it, of course.


it's not stupid to target your message to the level at which the electorate operates at.
2013-12-03 12:58:01 PM  
1 votes:

mrshowrules: Mike Chewbacca: mrshowrules: skullkrusher: That there is some despicable big governmentin' but Im pretty sure most women who have abortions aren't aborting rape babies. I could be wrong. I don't have a vagina.

There are stats on that.  Keep in mind that any women under the age of consent is a victim of statutory rape.  I think it accounts for nearly half if not more of abortions.

It's actually less than 18%. However it is overwhelmingly poor women who get abortions, and from a mathematical point of view, every aborted impoverished fetus is one less mouth we taxpayers have to feed and clothe.

That is total abortions.  What about elective abortions?

I wouldn't look at any abortions related to protecting the health of the mother.   Those should not be considered as abortions which can be avoided.


Only a small percentage of abortions are done to protect the health of the mother. Also, only ~2% of all abortions are performed at more than 20 weeks' gestational age. It's a really tiny number, in the low thousands. Minors only account for 7% of all abortions.
2013-12-03 12:56:24 PM  
1 votes:

flondrix: skullkrusher: Sex between two 16 year olds is not statutory rape

It is in some states.


It isn't in Michigan however.
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-12-03 12:47:04 PM  
1 votes:

monoski: The idea behind health insurance was not pick and choose procedures.


...except when the GOP doesn't agree with them.

It's like their laissez faire economic stance that they so strongly believe in... until the market turns and it's against them, then they want regulations regulations regulations.
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-12-03 12:43:38 PM  
1 votes:

Ab3: if I had a choice between voting for a Republican or a Sontaran I would take the Sontaran every time.


static2.wikia.nocookie.net

Today... These weird American's known as RE-publicans and their fascination with the vaginial system....
Ab3
2013-12-03 12:40:11 PM  
1 votes:
if I had a choice between voting for a Republican or a Sontaran I would take the Sontaran every time.
2013-12-03 12:36:25 PM  
1 votes:

formerfloozy: Aidan: serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)

IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.

That is definitely the case. My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal. It still makes me salty just thinking about it.


I got a vasectomy at 32 and the doc wouldn't do it unless my wife signed a paper saying she was OK with it.

/best present I ever gave myself
2013-12-03 12:33:17 PM  
1 votes:

Aidan: serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)

IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.


That is definitely the case. My doc even wanted a meeting with my ex husband to ensure he was down with me getting a tubal. It still makes me salty just thinking about it.
2013-12-03 12:32:14 PM  
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.

True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.


As I recall, it is more complicated and more dangerous procedure. They would rather have an IUD or something installed.

Insurance companies do like offering birth control and abortion services. They are good for the the plan holder (more options, potentially reduced premiums), the insurance company (less costly, more attractive plans due to options, and can reduce premiums), and society (less unwanted children, particularly in poor families that rely on government support). That is why these guys want to pass a law to stop them.
2013-12-03 12:27:57 PM  
1 votes:

balloot: I love Republicans.  I can't think of ANY circumstance where mentioning rape in any context has turned out well for them.  Yet they consistently feel the need to do it every few months, apparently in some grand quest to be the first political party with absolutely zero female votes in an election.



It amazes me how many women still vote for them, it is pretty sad.
2013-12-03 12:23:40 PM  
1 votes:

skullkrusher: I just re-read the article for evidence of Whitmer somehow exploiting or misrepresenting this issue, but failed to find it.  Could you please provide evidence of such?

By saying a rider for abortion coverage is "rape insurance". It's like what the entire article is about. A tiny fraction of abortions are necessary as the result of rape. As such, it's "unplanned pregnancy insurance" FAR more than it is "rape insurance". Not sure how it could be anymore clear.


And to be honest, I am not sure how the attempts of Right to Life of Michigan to prevent abortion from being subsidized by the ACA is anything but an attempt to punish sexually active women and, in admittedly rarer cases, to punish women who have sex forced upon them.

If it's an issue of cost rather than morality: I don't have the hard numbers, I confess, but I'd wager that subsidizing abortion is probably pretty inexpensive when we're subsidizing health care related to cancer, obesity, and other highly common health issues.


Just because I will never endure a rape pregnancy does not mean I feel stepped upon for helping support for those that do.
2013-12-03 12:18:00 PM  
1 votes:

Peki: Wow. There really is something pathological to the Republicans, isn't there? They really just can't stop talking about women's reproductive systems.


You're the real rapist for pointing that out.

See, this stupid libtard Demorat is attacking the most offensive aspect of the Republican bill, that even abortions due to rape shouldn't be covered. But since most abortions aren't due to rape, that makes her the real rapist, and you, and me, and all of us who decry Republican attitudes on rape.

/ rape rape rape rape rape
// any woman who votes Republican is out of her f*cking mind
2013-12-03 12:13:55 PM  
1 votes:
Bottom line for the GOP:  The more they talk, the less electable they are.  You want the GOP to go down in 2014?  Keep them talking.
2013-12-03 11:58:44 AM  
1 votes:
skullkrusher:

Yet, here, it is a Democratic female bandying about rape like the political football it has become.

Isn't it awful how often these Democrats bring up rape?
2013-12-03 11:47:23 AM  
1 votes:
You know, both sides are, in fact, bad, despite how that overly simplistic argument gets rightfully shot down here on Fark.

Democrats and Republicans both have a long-standing history of being utterly, insanely wrong on matters of economy, the military, social justice, foreign policy, domestic policy - you name it.

BUT

There is only one party that has an appallingly glib, morally confused, utterly repugnant stance on what is arguably the ugliest act one human can perform on another.

http://www.dayswithoutagoprapemention.com/

The comments in the above link are not isolated incidents.  They are not taken out of context.  They are a clear, consistent pattern of dangerously hateful rhetoric.

1 in 3 women are victims of sexual abuse.  No matter who you are, you know victims of sexual abuse.  Many of the women in your life, whom you love and care about, have had to endure an unspeakably heinous invasion of their body and by extension, their minds, souls, and lives, and the lives of their loved ones.

And anyone that is flippant, confused, or ambivalent to this awful act and its consequences, I would assess as ignorant and callous to a sociopathic degree.

Democrats suck, there's no denying that.  But I vote for them because the alternative is, quite literally, the Pro Rape Party.
2013-12-03 11:40:50 AM  
1 votes:
How's that Rape Foot taste, 'Pubs?  You guys sure do like stuffing it in your mouth.
2013-12-03 11:40:05 AM  
1 votes:

runin800m: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I'm probably going to sound like an asshole here, but why is that the states responsibility? If I'm assaulted and beaten the state isn't going to cover my medical bills because I was the victim of a crime. Why should this one crime be any different?


How about rapist insurance.  Every individual of legal age has to purchase rape insurance in the event that they rape somebody, there will be a payout to the person raped for expenses?  And so as not to offend the free market Repubs, we'll allow price discrimination. j
2013-12-03 11:35:29 AM  
1 votes:

Barry Lyndon's Annuity Cheque: You're a pro-lifer who thinks that women shouldn't be tried as murderers for having abortions?
Congratulations, you're an asshole.


Consistency across the board still doesn't make them anything more than busybodies.
2013-12-03 11:31:34 AM  
1 votes:

Warlordtrooper: whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.

Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic


It is if they're the rapist. Committing a violent crime is nature's way of saying "I don't get a voice in this anymore"
2013-12-03 11:24:37 AM  
1 votes:

Warlordtrooper: Well men are on the hook for support so it isn't fair to say they have no interest in this topic


I'm not sure a civil obligation gets you a seat at a table where basic human rights are being discussed.  That being said, I don't even think women should get a seat at a discussion where we're talking about forcing someone to do something with their bodies without an extremely good reason.  That should just, by default, be a decision one individual gets to make about their own body purely on the virtue that they're a human being and that we value human rights.
2013-12-03 11:18:55 AM  
1 votes:

mainstreet62: SurfaceTension: It's all good, I've got rape insurance!

[static5.businessinsider.com image 400x300]

neversubmit: [www.bartcop.com image 749x472]

OH GOD WHY DID YOU BOTH POST CONSECUTIVELY! NOW I SEE FLO WEARING PANTIES!!!

GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH


What? She's not *ugly.* And the panty woman has flat abs. So settle down there, Studman.
2013-12-03 11:18:05 AM  
1 votes:
Rape Insurance


www.imfdb.org
2013-12-03 11:12:16 AM  
1 votes:
I propose that Republicans, conservatives, and independents get themselves ball-kicking insurance, because at this point I am dead set to kick every one I see right in the jimmy sack.

/seriously, fark YOU fark YOU fark YOU
2013-12-03 11:11:58 AM  
1 votes:

I_C_Weener: mrshowrules: Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.

I agree and you realize this includes all abortions of under-aged women.

I'm against aborting under age women.


But you're fine with aborting underage men?

Or are you just against the basic principles of grammar, in addition to stubbornly trying to make this thread be about what you want it to be about, rather than what it actually IS about?
2013-12-03 11:08:37 AM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: Do they do that for tubal ligation or are you referring to the pill as a "fix"? Not a fair comparison between one-time surgery and a daily prescription.
But if it's actually the surgeries, the only excuse I can think of is that girl parts are more expensive to operate on. The vasectomy happens right there in the doctors office, right? Snip snip and you're done. Tube tying is a full on surgery. (Probably still cheaper than a baby or abortions though)


IIRC my tubal (in Michigan in about 2006) was about $4000. With insurance it was about $30, but I doubt anyone's gonna get that kind of deal. It was a full-on hospital bed, hot feeling in the arm from the anasthetic, wheel me in and so forth deal.

Also, from what I've heard on the Farks, many doctors refuse to do tubals for young women (like under 70) or women who haven't had kids.
2013-12-03 10:57:23 AM  
1 votes:

Tricky Chicken: And while rape insurance is crazy, I do think that if a woman is raped, any expenses she incurrs (medical, counseling, whatever) as a result should be covered, probably by the state.


Only as a subset of the fact that  all basic care in a civilized nation should be covered by the state.  Basically if it's a procedure that more than a couple thousand people get in a year and it's non-elective, or it's rare but falls within reasonable cost limits, the state should cover it and pull the funding from taxes.

Having the state foot the bill only in the case of crimes committed is sort of an invitation to unscrupulous people to lie about being victims to get free stuff, and we've got enough of that kind of crap as it is in sexual assault cases already, thanks.
2013-12-03 10:56:48 AM  
1 votes:
I thought Republicans called that a gun?

/ducks, runs like hades
2013-12-03 10:47:58 AM  
1 votes:

Mercutio74: Our conservative party is pretty much what a "moderate" Democrat would be, except even they won't overtly attack socialized medicine.


Aren't your "moderate Democrats" currently doing their best to eviscerate science and education funding?
2013-12-03 10:44:53 AM  
1 votes:

lennavan: whistleridge: lennavan: whistleridge: Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really.

I agree you have no idea what you are talking about but it's different than what you think.  Men get raped too.  See for instance: prison.

Men do in fact get raped. Especially in prison. But they don't get pregnant from it, and therefore the current matter of conversation doesn't apply to them. Thank you for playing though.

When we're talking about paying for AIDS contracted through rape, men get a seat at the table.

When you posted:

"Rape is a horrible thing. Yes, it's being *slightly* blown up, but you and I are both dudes: we don't have the first damn idea of what we're talking about, not really."

I assumed you were talking about rape and not pregnancy because you used the word rape and never used the word pregnancy.

WTF was I thinking?


That my comment was in the context of the thread, which is in turn in the context of the article in question? Because otherwise, you weren't. 

If you're not here to talk about the ins and outs rape, pregnancy resulting from rape, aborting said pregnancy, and how/who pays for it, you're either trolling, or you're an idiot.
2013-12-03 10:33:36 AM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.

How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.


True.  But my insurance was happy to "fix" me because I wanted a vasectomy.  But they don't like paying for "fixing" women without a medical necessity.  I don't understand their reasoning.
2013-12-03 10:32:56 AM  
1 votes:
I just don't get it.  If I ran an insurance company (thankfully I don't have that kind of soul killing job where you have to choose profit or principles) I would be falling all over myself to offer abortion procedures to anyone who wanted them (even men, just to be safe).  If you force a woman you're covering to have an unwanted baby, that baby becomes a dependent...  basically, a liability to your bottom line.
2013-12-03 10:31:43 AM  
1 votes:

whistleridge: However, it IS insurance that doesn't cover abortion in the instance of rape, save if you get a rider. And that rider would be de facto rape insurance.


I get car insurance...but it doesn't cover flat tires...even flat tires caused by pot holes instead of angry ex-girlfriends...without a rider.  That doesn't make the rider pothole insurance.  That makes it flat tire insurance.
2013-12-03 10:31:27 AM  
1 votes:

palladiate: I_C_Weener: Having now read the article, it is a "Let's not let abortion be standard in our insurance plans" not a "buy rape insurance" bill.

It's actually "No insurance company can provide this coverage by default in Michigan, not even for cases of rape" bill. It specifically prohibits insurers from offering this coverage in their plans. You'll have to buy a rider if they're even offered, which by the by, aren't cheap.


How do you come to the "aren't cheap" conclusion? Does the bill specify prices?
I could see an insurance company deciding its cheaper to pay for your abortion than it is to pay for your baby, offering it as a free add-on.
2013-12-03 10:26:35 AM  
1 votes:

mrshowrules: Is it legitimate rape insurance or just rape insurance?

When will the GOP learn to just stay completely clear of any subject related to rape.


It's rape rape insurance
2013-12-03 10:01:33 AM  
1 votes:
Here's the thing. If you're raped, it should be the rapists insurance paying for the abortion. Like the at-fault driver in a car accident. Maybe the republicans could compromise by including "uninsured rapist" coverage by default.
2013-12-03 09:59:51 AM  
1 votes:
img.photobucket.com
2013-12-03 09:34:17 AM  
1 votes:
The Rapublican Party.
2013-12-03 09:32:42 AM  
1 votes:

gopher321: How about if you all come up with 'Republican' insurance? Next time the GOP are elected, the insurance companies have to pay out. Don't know what the premiums would be, but it might be worth it.

/dumb idea of the week


R-ape insurance?
2013-12-03 08:47:56 AM  
1 votes:
FTFA: "Requiring Michigan women to plan ahead for an unplanned pregnancy is not only illogical, it's one of the most misogynistic proposals I have ever seen in the Michigan Legislature."

Geeze lady, how else are you going to lower the rate of unplanned pregnancies, besides making people plan for them?

Seems like a smart strategy to me.
 
Displayed 76 of 76 comments

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