Rush Limbaugh’s Flakey Fluke logic
Unless you’ve spent the last week or so with cotton in your ears, you’ve heard wind of the Rush Limbaugh commentary on Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke and the debacle that has affectionately come to be known as “slut-gate.” But if you haven’t please refer to these sources.
If you’re anything like me you feel a little dirty after listening to that fecal wad talk so feel free to take a few moments to grab a quick shower before continuing to the remainder of the post. I’ll wait.
It’s hard to listen to Rush Limbaugh speak without wanting to hurl but since the only thing I heard about on the news for the past week was people’s reflections on what he said I finally went back and listened to his commentary. And of course his commentary gave me the usual physical reaction but this time it was intensified not as much by the slanderous and completely inexcusable way he attacked Sandra Fluke but by the complete inaccuracy of almost everything he said.
Do Republican’s really take this guy seriously? Like for real for real? I question the morals and intelligence of anyone who can listen to that man speak for more than 5 minutes and not want to vomit.
Based on Limbaugh “logic” Fluke can be reasonably assumed to be both a slut and a prostitute because she wants birth control to be covered under her insurance plan. Note that I said covered under her plan that she PAYS for not handed out for free the way that Limbaugh characterized it. Well to be more accurate he characterized including said coverage in an insurance plan as “paying for her to have sex.” And took it even further and said that as compensation for us “paying for her to have sex” she should send us all tapes of her in the act.
Besides demonstrating that he’s a walking sack of fertilizer which we already knew Limbaugh demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about how birth control works. I can overlook him being a jerk but that kind of stupid is inexcusable.
He said Fluke and her friends were having “so much sex that they couldn’t afford their birth control”.
Sir the amount of birth control you take is not regulated by the number of times you have sex. That’s just not how it works.
Also the $3000 figure she quoted is the price of birth control without insurance coverage for the 7-8 years it takes to complete law school. It doesn’t mean she wants to have $3000 worth of sex….whatever the heck that means.
Now let’s enter Limbaugh land and use a little bit of Limbaugh logic. If covering birth control pills under an insurance plan is paying for people to have sex then by extension isn’t covering a child’s delivery also paying (a whole lot more money) for people to have sex?
Since we’re talking about paying for people’s personal choices let’s go a step further…
Isn’t paying for cholesterol meds, high blood pressure meds and other medications that treat food related disorders paying fat asses like Limbaugh for their unhealthy eating? I suppose insurance companies should drop those coverages as well. Many of the things that people wind up going to doctors for are due to lifestyle choices. So based on Limbaugh logic insurance shouldn’t pay for anything that might be the result of a lifestyle choice. If you break your leg walking down the stairs why should everyone else on your plan have to pay for your choice to take the stairs instead of riding in an elevator like the rest of us lazy bastards.
Oh I forgot to point out that Limbaugh completely neglected to mention that birth control pills are prescribed to treat many other conditions besides preventing pregnancy. Half the women I know are on birth control for some non sex related reason. This is because in reality prevention of pregnancy is really one of many side effects of the hormone adjusting drug known as “the pill”. They’re frequently prescribed to treat painful periods, cysts, etc. That they also help prevent pregnancy could be viewed as a bonus.
I swear if men had periods pills that help ease the symptoms would be standard in all insurance coverage …. wait no…they would have already come up with a “cure” for the period by now because men wouldn’t just accept bleeding constantly with intense pain and mood swings for 5-7 days as a normal part of life. But women who want access to drugs to ease the pain and possibly as a bonus avoid bringing a much more expensive child into the world are automatically sluts and prostitutes.
Republicans are spinning the debate into being about protecting their religious freedoms. But the freedom they’re trying to protect is their right as religious institutions who employ people to impose their beliefs onto their employees who do not share their faith. And in some cases they’re denying access to medication to treat conditions that have nothing to do with violating their faith. This is the murky water you get into when religion, politics and employment mix. I wonder if they have issues like this in secular societies like France.
Speaking of France, they care way more about women’s vagina’s than Americans do…but in a good way…