Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
March 4, 2012
The Declaration of Independence grants us, the American people, “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” not life, liberty and the pursuit of a happy ending.
Thus should be the message Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke takes away from her testimony before Congress when she demanded that the government pay for her birth control in order to enjoy her more carnal pursuits.
The issue of contraception/birth control should be a non-starter in the grand scheme of campaign 2012. However, for Barack Hussein Obama, it is an excellent diversionary tactic to sidetrack the nation’s attention from his complete and utter incompetence in handling the affairs of state as apologizer in chief while continuing to run the economy into the ground.
Yet, because the issue of contraception has been Page One for weeks as an aspect of Obama-care and the mandate that forces American citizens to purchase a product, time must be wasted to remind people that they are not entitled to something simply because they claim they cannot afford it. Not to mention such a mandate violates the Commerce Clause – Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.
Catholic institutions such as hospitals, charitable organizations and educational institutions, of which Georgetown University is one, have objected vehemently, with the support of patriots of other faiths, that forcing them to offer contraceptives as part of its healthcare insurance coverage violates church teachings. Of course it also violates the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Yet, there sat Fluke, a law student, age 30, seeking to have government force her university to violate its principles based upon the teachings of the church to which it adheres. Was Fluke not aware of the connection between her Jesuit university and the Catholic Church? If so, her request is disingenuous at best, and if this issue were that much of an imperative for her, she could most certainly gained admission into another law school. Georgetown is an excellent law school, after all.
Fluke further claimed she would spend $3,000 on contraceptives during her law school career – three years. At $1,000 per year Fluke is spending $83.33 per month. Apparently either Fluke is a poor shopper or an extremely active woman between the sheets. First issue first – Fluke’s ability to comparison shop. Condoms can be procured for less than $10 a box of a dozen or about $25 per month at a condom a day. She is in law school after all; does she study?
Having spoken with several women friends, they confirmed birth control costs at $16 a month at Costco and either $5 per month or $9 per quarter at Wal-Mart. Fluke cold also visit her local Planned Parenthood which would no doubt offer her a helpful discount. Not to mention, at most public institutions of higher learning, such as the University of Maryland, condoms can be garnered for free at its health center.
As for the second issue – that of Fluke’s potential promiscuity, not to pile on to Rush Limbaugh’s remarks calling Fluke a slut and a prostitute while asking for her to make sex tapes available for public purview in light of taxpayer funding of her sexual escapades, but he has a point, in spite of his apology for his overzealous speech. Limbaugh was wrong to call Fluke a slut – a slut gives it away, while Fluke is expecting, in her liberal sense of entitlement, for government to pay for her sexual activities. That in turn is the essence of prostitution. Limbaugh was also wrong and, quite frankly, creepy, to expect video of Fluke to be made public.
And while Limbaugh was opining on air, Obama, who apparently had nothing better to do than call Fluke and applaud her for standing strong and offering his support, thus sealing Fluke’s image as the national face of contraceptives. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney supported Obama’s call to Fluke explaining that it is wrong to publically attack private citizens, yet did not castigate his boss’s public criticism of the Koch brothers – David and Charles, also private citizens. Just another example of the Obama administration’s hypocrisy.
Regardless of who is standing on which side of this non-starter of an issue, it is wrong for Fluke to make demands of her university that go contrary to its beliefs. What next – will non-Mormons demand beer and coffee at Brigham Young University?
As a taxpayer, I should not be subjected to pay for Fluke’s or anyone else’s sexual proclivities. I know I’m not having the sex, but I sure feel like I’m getting screwed.
Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.
Thank you for pointing out the hypocrisy of this administrations admonition of attacking Fluke as a private citizen while simultaneously attacking the Koch brother, also private citizens. Its disgusting and the media is certainly not out there pointing this out. Fluke said a woman should not have to choose between her health and a superior education. Really? A superior Catholic school has to violate its beliefs to accommodate her choice of college. There are many reasons to choose a college, if its THAT important to her, she chose poorly. They're not denying her a cancer drug or a treatment for an illness... she needs to get a grip and comparison shop.
ReplyDeleteJust because it's not nice to call someone a slut doesn't mean it isn't true. Obama played this brilliantly though--reviving the old Republicans are obsessed with social issues theme to distract people from his destruction of our economy. Too many fell into the trap. The CORE issue isn't even religious liberty: it's whether a person is entitled to free coverage of a lifestyle choice. Contraception is a choice, freely made, not a medical necessity. Why, you could make a better case for free sex change operations (mental health).
ReplyDeleteOne more thing: liberals have succeeded in framing this as a health issue. Considering that contraceptives encourage indiscriminate sex but do not protect you from STDs, it can actually contribute to women's health problems.
ReplyDelete