Good question! And should men who have sex with women who have their BC covered by their insurance (a law in 33 states. . . has been for many years, with no controversy!) considered the "pimps" of those "sluts and prostitutes?"
Apparently, you have very differing opinions when YOU choose the analogies or when someone else chooses them! I kind of prefer more accurate analogies. . . and more precise language than "you don't haz it!" But humor appears to be in the eye of the beholder. . . and yours sucks!
So, you think (like your hero Limbutt) that a woman needs to take a pill every time she has sex, so that you can "calculate" how many time she has sex in a day, a month, or a year, based on the cost of her birth control medication and the exams that are related to the prescription of birth control? You are so funny!
Well, why don't we look at one article that was written far before this silly GOP induced controversy, and see where the REAL truth about where the money based interests of the insurance industry are!
She can get condoms for a buck apiece. So care to clear up the question posed. How times a day does an unmarried woman have to have sex to become a slut?
Give the ladies the pill, the courts will suffer the consequences. Less men will be arrested and put in jail. Less men will have to pay for 18 years, The tax payers won't have to pay for 18 years and on and on. More importantly. Women won't be as easily lead to the Socialist party. They won't need the hand outs if they don't have kids they can't afford. Obama is going to kill off 50% or so of the ladies vote for Dems. Another unintended consequence. I say Yes!
Facebook Laura Ingraham "Ed Schultz called me a slut last May...still waiting for Obama's call." http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Laura-Ingraham/271042954725
I heard that Schultz did this - once - not for days on end building up to cruder and more obscene insults each day. I also heard that Schultz apologized and was suspended by the network. We've seen what passes for PP Rush's "apology" which was mostly an attempt to convince people that he was just "being funny" which won't wash with anybody of reasonable intelligence and I have yet to hear that he's been reprimanded in any way other than by his sponsors who're leaving him. I don't know of a single Republican who's objected to what he did other than Boehner meekly calling it "inappropriate" and Santorum excusing him as "just being absurd" which are PP Rush's own words. IMO Obama called Fluke because she was insulted and savaged by PP Rush and his followers because she testified in support of his BC policy. As far as I know, when Schultz called Ingraham a "slut" - and I have no idea why he did that - the "Liberal media" and talking heads and politicians didn't jump on board and join in the name-calling - like we've seen here on this board. If they had, Obama might have called her, too. But maybe he thought the fact that MSNBC took action on their own and let it be known that they wouldn't tolerate that sort of thing and suspended him was enough.
Really? Did she state that somewhere? Or are you just trying to paint her as a sex-crazy slut in a sad attempt to invalidate her opinion?
Hey leftists, In this clash between the Commerce Clause of the Constitution and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment you folks believe the Commerce Clause takes precedence. If this is true, then what limit (if any) is there on federal power under the Commerce Clause?
Is that why you are still a virgin... Because you think you can't live up to the challenge of giving a woman 1000 orgasms...
Obviously a Conservative Wife, since they know so much about Women naturally they start with their own. What Number Rush and Newt are on ... 6 or 7 Combined. That's just two (2) Conservative Men
Originally Posted by Bluesguy View Post Have we established what does or does not make a woman slut? Huh?..............
Have we crossed back into the 1950's?...where if a woman sleeps weith a man before marriage, she's a floozy? It's like women's lib never happened with some of these Christian social fundamentalists. Why do men think they can dictate the sexual behaviors of women all over again?...didn't we clearly get past that?....
Have we crossed back into the 1950's?...where if a woman sleeps weith a man before marriage, she's a floozy? It's like women's lib never happened with some of these Christian social fundamentalists. Why do men think they can dictate the sexual behaviors of women all over again?...didn't we clearly get past that?....