My money shouldn't fund what you do here. That's your business personally and financially.
Being that I don’t watch the news, I heard about this Rush Limbaugh and Sandra Fluke controversy via social networks then read some articles online.
This debate has ignited some heated and hate-filled debate. As an outsider, I’ll step in and declare them both losers.
Mr. Limbaugh, please remove your foot from your mouth, if you can. You have become just like those you denounce for being loud-mouth name-callers.
Ms. Fluke, please respect your fellow citizens enough to not ask daddy-government to take our money from us to give to you so you can do as you please on our dime. I shouldn’t have to pay for your contraceptives for sex with people that aren’t me.
This whirlwind of anger from both sides is disheartening, especially when neither side is being logical. So let’s agree to leave emotion at the door as we delve into the issue.
Ms. Fluke, like all other citizens, should have the right to complete privacy regarding her sex life. Sex is a choice, however, and with a choice comes responsibilities and consequences. It is her and/or her partners responsibility to acquire contraceptives or pay the consequences of their actions, whatever those may be.
Saying that the government shouldn’t be providing free (or discounted) contraceptives and abortions is (generally) NOT an attack on women (please stop playing the victim card); it’s an attack on big government. Should the government be providing free alcohol and marijuana? Of course it shouldn’t. All those things should be available to those who want them, but at a cost to the individual desiring them.
Saying that the government should provide free (or discounted) contraceptives and abortions is (generally) NOT an attack on religious people or people practicing abstinence. It’s just ignorance about economics and/or the desire for the government to take care of everything.
You want contraceptives covered in healthcare plans? Go to the insurance providers and demand them. In a free market, that would quickly get you what you want: if your current provider refused, someone would start an insurance plan that covered it so you would buy insurance from them.
It’s not the government’s job to take care of your every wish and desire. Take care of yourself and let everyone else do the same.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
“Should the government be providing free alcohol and marijuana? Of course it shouldn’t. All those things should be available to those who want them, but at a cost to the individual desiring them.”
Your argument isn’t too bad; however, there seems to be a logical fallacy somewhere in there. OH yeah, a false analogy. Government-issued contraceptives are hardly the same as government-issued pot and alcohol. Contraceptives are GOOD, RESPONSIBLE choices and serve a logical purpose. Alcohol and pot… well- are purely recreational (no medicinal function in most states) and can remove responsibility from the equation. It’s not even apples and oranges here; it’s apples and… lasagna.
With that being said, however, I am in agreeance. I do not want the government controlling anything about my body/womb/etc/ and I feel like this is the first step down that slippery slope.
I’m glad you see where the 1984-esque government could take this. You’re a keen observer.
It’s not apples and lasagna: marijuana has medical benefits. The point of the comparison though is that all those things are choices and we each need to be responsible (like you said) for our own choices. Who’s to say that alcohol and marijuana can’t/doesn’t serve a logical purpose or be a good choice? Be careful before making broad generalizations about other people’s actions.
Thanks for the comment. See you soon.