26
   

Obviously Revenues Were Threatened

 
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 10:53 am
@maxdancona,
Generally, that's the case, but apparently this particular insurance program had a problem with paying for oral contraceptives if they thought the purpose was to prevent pregnancy. Read the testimony.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 11:29 am
@DrewDad,
Hey guys. Am I wrong in thinking that some insurance companies pay for our little blue pill? Dont we use it for sex? Does that make those of who use it sluts?
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 11:45 am
@RABEL222,
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/birth-control-viagra-vasectomy-laws

I listened to a terrific radio interview with Senator Turner about this one yesterday

Quote:
Ohio: A bill introduced by state Sen. Nina Turner would compel men to get psychological screenings before getting prescriptions for impotence meds.

"We must advocate for the traditional family," Turner said, "and ensure that all men using PDE-5 inhibitors are healthy, stable, and educated about their options—including celibacy as a viable life choice."

Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 11:49 am
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/birth-control-viagra-vasectomy-laws

I listened to a terrific radio interview with Senator Turner about this one yesterday

Quote:
Ohio: A bill introduced by state Sen. Nina Turner would compel men to get psychological screenings before getting prescriptions for impotence meds.

"We must advocate for the traditional family," Turner said, "and ensure that all men using PDE-5 inhibitors are healthy, stable, and educated about their options—including celibacy as a viable life choice."


There is no want of the weird and pitiful in the lust of old men for young women, which some people think is all about viagra...
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 11:50 am
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

Hey guys. Am I wrong in thinking that some insurance companies pay for our little blue pill? Dont we use it for sex? Does that make those of who use it sluts?
Male sluts are too numerous to qualify as a subset of all men...
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 12:00 pm
@ehBeth,
Your kidding right? A man in Ohio (if the bill passes) will have to pass some kind screening test for "traditional family man" before an insurance will cover pills for impotence? I betcha a gay man will have a hard time passes their "psychological screenings". Are they checking to see if even married heterosexuals are having sex for purposes of having a child? Most men who need those pills are not having sex for the purpose of having more children. Talk about big brother watching over you.

What gets me is that everyone is talking as though insurance covers all cost of a prescription when most insurance plans issued by employers/universities all have co-pays and some you have to pay a cost to have insurance in the first place.
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 12:02 pm
@revelette,
It's an actual bill, but it's definitely meant to prove a point (goose/ gander).
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 12:04 pm
@revelette,
follow the link

there are some definite points being made out there
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 12:18 pm
@sozobe,
I doubt though that men would be so quick to support such legislation as they were with women's contraceptive health issues.

The following is the Bill:

Quote:
Columbus) -State Senator Nina Turner (D-Cleveland) announced legislation today that would protect men in Ohio from the risks of PDE-5 inhibitors, drugs commonly used to treat symptoms of impotence. Turner's legislation would include provisions to document that the symptoms are not psychological in nature, and would guide men to make the right decision for their bodies. Physicians would be required to obtain a second opinion from a psychological professional to verify that a patient has a true medical malady before the medication could be prescribed.

"The men in our lives, including members of the General Assembly, generously devote time to fundamental female reproductive issues--the least we can do is return the favor," Senator Turner said. "It is crucial that we take the appropriate steps to shelter vulnerable men from the potential side effects of these drugs."

The legislation follows the FDA's recommendation that the evaluation of erectile dysfunction should include a determination of potential underlying causes and the identification of appropriate treatment following a complete medical assessment. Similar bills to more closely regulate reproductive health issues have been introduced in the state legislatures of Virginia, Oklahoma, Idaho, and most recently Pennsylvania.

"When a man makes a crucial decision about his health and his body, he should be fully aware of the alternative options and the lifetime repercussions of that decision," Senator Turner said today. Men will be more easily guided through the process of obtaining treatment for impotence so they can better understand and more effectively address their condition.

PDE-5 inhibitors can carry serious side effects such as priapism, hearing loss, and vision loss, and can be detrimental to men with heart problems, including heart pain, abnormal heart rhythms, high or low blood pressure, or a history of stroke.

"By implementing more intensive screenings before prescribing the medication and requiring outpatient educational services, we can do more to prevent the potential side effects linked to PDE-5 inhibitors," Senator Turner explained. "We must advocate for the traditional family, protect the sanctity of procreation, and ensure that all men using PDE-5 inhibitors are healthy, stable, and educated about their options--including celibacy as a viable life choice. This legislation will do just that."


source

sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 12:21 pm
@revelette,
Quote:
"The men in our lives, including members of the General Assembly, generously devote time to fundamental female reproductive issues--the least we can do is return the favor"


Smile
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 01:05 pm
@revelette,
revelette - have you followed the link I gave to Mother Jones yet?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 01:43 pm
@DrewDad,
I'm not defending what he said. It was crude and over the line. He needed to apologize and he did. Doesn't wipe the slate clean, but who really cares? He's a radio guy.

It pisses me off that he helped the Left turn the issue of religious freedom on it's ear. One would think he was in cahoots with them. He's a smart man and irrespective of his tepid denials that he is a spokesman for any party or movement, a ton of people think he is, and he knows it. This wasn't just a slip of the tongue, he went after her for two or three days.

How could he not have realized he was giving Obama and the Left a big fat present?

If he is really as dedicated to the cause of conservatism as he trumpets he would not have crossed the line in the first place, and he would have knocked it off after the first day.

I'm not defending him, but I am arguing that the woman doesn't have a sustainable cause of action on the basis of slander, and I am a bit sick and tired of the double standard liberals apply to these matters.

Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a "twat." There may be only one other epithet more crude and insulting to women.

Where was the furor from the Left?

Playboy ran an article about conservative women who were ripe for rape. Where was the furor from the Left that even approached that which has followed Limbaugh calling a woman a slut?

I don't expect liberals to go nuts when twits like Maher, Olbermann and Schultz cross the line, but their hue and cry when someone like Limbaugh or Coulter does strongly reflects hypocrisy and/or intellectual dishonesty.

Somehow when a Leftie utters or prints these sort of crude and demeaning slurs, its "artistic license," but when a conservative does, it heinous and actionable.

I'm also somewhat flabbergasted by the Left's transparent effort to cast this women in the role of your average college student who merely expressed her opinion and was attacked by Limbaugh. She is a social activist who went to Georgetown so she could upend it's religion based policies.

Look what the Left and the MSM did to Joe the Plumber when he had the nerve to ask Obama a question. Public officials when after him with a vengeance, and in one case, broke the law and her oath in doing so.

So yeah, Limbaugh is a pompous blowhard who crossed the civility line, and I'm not about to defend his doing so, but pardon me if I gag a bit when faced with so much hypocritical bullshit from liberals.

It's pretty telling that you see that argument and the argument concerning a slander suit to be "defending" Limbaugh.
DrewDad
 
  4  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 01:58 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
I am arguing that the woman doesn't have a sustainable cause of action on the basis of slander

Free legal opinions on the Internet.... I always wonder why this practice doesn't put lawyers out of business.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Look what the Left and the MSM did to Joe the Plumber when he had the nerve to ask Obama a question.

You mean pointing out that he was completely unable to distinguish between "sale price" and "income"?

He tried to put a "gotcha" question to Obama, but showed himself to be completely out of his depth.

Lots of people like to read failblog for the same kind of spectacle.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 02:05 pm
@DrewDad,
A typical DrewDad response.

You select one or two comments, take them out of context and concoct a vapid reply that you think is brilliantly clever. Meanwhile you duck the substance of the post to which you are responding.

It got you a thumbs up though so keep on keep'n on DD because it's perfectly clear that this is why you frequent this forum.
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 02:09 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
if you didn't put stupid comments in your posts, we wouldn't feel the need to make comments on your stupid comments...

why are you here, finn?

seriously, since you brought it up.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  4  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 02:10 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Your problem is that you keep seeming to say, "Democrats do it, too, so we should get a pass."

That's a completely bankrupt position, so I see no need to address it.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  6  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 02:18 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I'm not defending what he said. It was crude and over the line. He needed to apologize and he did. Doesn't wipe the slate clean, but who really cares?

That attitude right there is why Republicans are losing women voters.



Who cares if women can access birth control?

I do. Not Republicans, though, because they keep trying to restrict access to it by doing things like declaring fertilized eggs "people."


Who cares if women have access to safe abortion options?

I do. Not Republicans, though, who keep trying to put in blocks that make access to abortion more difficult. (See: transvaginal ultrasound)


Who cares if Rush calls a woman a slut because she dares to talk openly about getting birth control?

I do. Not Finn, though. Obviously.
Fido
 
  0  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 03:58 pm
@DrewDad,
Just as in Muslim lands, you will find many women who conspire with men in the subjugation of women, and it is cultural... Too many women remind me of my own dear Grandmother who had many children, but was cared for only by her daughters... She was bold enough to tell a doctor, with one of her daughters in the room that she had lost one daughter, but thought it would have been much worse to lose a son; and her sons would not spend a dime on her or lift a finger to help her, so figure that... The republicans will lose the middle over this rush ****, but the hard core of republican women will forgive anything because they are clones or robots of the worst sort, unwilling or unable to think critically or creatively... In other words, they are exactly like the men they marry...
hawkeye10
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 06:00 pm
@Fido,
It is for instince the women who do the deed and who push clit chopping, men have almost nothing to do with it. This is not a story that the feminsts want told however, so most Americans have no clue of what the truth is. The story told is the same story that is always told....it is all the fault of the men, "Men SUCK!"......
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Mar, 2012 06:36 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:


Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a "twat." There may be only one other epithet more crude and insulting to women.

Where was the furor from the Left?

Playboy ran an article about conservative women who were ripe for rape. Where was the furor from the Left that even approached that which has followed Limbaugh calling a woman a slut?


Hmm... what's the difference between Coulter, Palin, and other hateful women on the far-right wing, and this law student who was speaking to Congress?

Could it be that one group actively spreads venom, and therefore invites upon themselves, whereas the other did not, and therefore isn't seen as a legitimate target?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's the case. Palin, Coulter and other right-wing loudmouths deserve to get the same crap they deal out all day. Nobody feels sorry for them, because they aren't innocents.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 11:56:15