GOP shuts down Sandra Fluke (again)

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Cigar, Feb 23, 2012.

  1. Cigar

    Cigar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,478
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Last week, the House Oversight Committee, led by Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), held a one-sided hearing on contraception access, featuring an opening panel of five conservative men -- and no one else. Democrats on the committee had invited a witness, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, but Issa refused to allow her to participate.

    House Dems aren't taking "no" for an answer.

    There was, however, an unexpected twist yesterday afternoon. The Democratic Steering & Policy Committee's hearing will be held in the House Recording Studio, in order to help broadcast the event, except in this case, it won't be seen by anyone outside the room. According to House Dems, the Republican-controlled Committee on House Administration has refused to allow the hearing to be televised.

    In other words, the House GOP blocked Sandra Fluke from testifying at a hearing last week, and now they're apparently blocking Sandra Fluke from testifying at another hearing this week.

    And what is it, exactly, about Fluke's perspective that has Republicans so concerned? The law student wants to share the story of a classmate who lost an ovary due to an ailment that could have been treated with birth control.

    Here's a video of Fluke, sharing a perspective the House GOP apparently doesn't want you to see:

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/22/10476406-gop-shuts-down-sandra-fluke-again




    I wonder what they are afraid of … and guesses?
     
  2. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The dems desperately want to make this about contraception instead of the separation of Church and State. I can see why since they are the champions of the separation.
     
  3. CoolWalker

    CoolWalker New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    3,979
    Likes Received:
    167
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They always twist things to suit their agenda. Remember the master of semantics was a dem...Clinton. Right...a "bj" isn't sex.
     
  4. PatriotNews

    PatriotNews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    27,756
    Likes Received:
    3,715
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The party that once fought for a woman's right to privacy has now used their own government run health care system to take away a woman's right to privacy (as well as every man's right to privacy btw) and at the same time is using it to destroy an enumerated right in the First Amendment, religious freedom.

    The point the democrats and their lacky Sandra Fluke are trying to make here is mute. If her girlfriend wanted to take birth control, she could have taken birth control. Just because a law allows an exception for religious organizations on religious grounds to not provide a service does not mean that person cannot go and obtain that service on their own. Isn't that why the government funds Planned Parenthood?
     
  5. BTeamBomber

    BTeamBomber Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,732
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    48
    This is ridiculous. How is it that in a population where women outnumber men, not ONE woman is involved in this debate as part of this committee? Are you serious? This is a PRIME example of how disconnected from reality Congress is.

    I hope this becomes a main issue for the election this year, as we'd see disconnected, idiot GOP do-nothing Congressmen thrown out in droves from the House.
     
  6. Cigar

    Cigar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,478
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It already has ... I personally know some women who are not political at all, are NOW Anti-Conservative.

    Brilliant ... Republicans ... just Brilliant.

    All Minorities, Gays, Poor ... now Women.

    Soon their Tent will be nothing more than a Trailer in Trailer Park.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Johnny-C

    Johnny-C Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    34,039
    Likes Received:
    429
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Republicans will pay for this, for a few generations. Of course, they'll complain that the "jury" (which is this NATION) has no right to hold them in contempt.
     
  8. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is ironic that we have one this thread where the libs are trying to force requirements onto a religious organization that is against that organization's beliefs and the cons are fighting it under "Separation of Church and State".

    And we also have a thread where cons what the word "God" left in the Pledge of Allegiance and the libs want the word remove....under "Separation of Church and State".

    Go figure.
     
  9. Cigar

    Cigar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,478
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male


    Majority Rules ... is this Democracy thing new to you or are you somehow not feeling special anymore.

    Go Figure !
     
  10. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ummm, we are a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy......or is this something new to you?

    Mob rule is not the rule of the land.
     
  11. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Still not a woman's issue but a citizen's issue. This is about the constitution, not women's rights.

    Still not a contraception hearing but a hearing on the right's of Religion.
     
  12. Cigar

    Cigar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,478
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wow ... Just Wow. :roll:
     
  13. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was a hearing on the separation of Church and State, but I guess you never caught on to anything other than the flapping lips of the Dems that want to change the subject.
     
  14. Cigar

    Cigar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,478
    Likes Received:
    2,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So Women are not allowed to talk about separation of Church and State?

    What are they afraid of that she will say?
     
  15. PatrickT

    PatrickT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2009
    Messages:
    16,593
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I wonder if the Republicans will change the locks like the Democrats did and then refuse to give them keys like the Democrats did.

    I would suggest that if liberals want separation of church and state they should pass a law to that effect the next time they're in the majority or, absent ever being in the majority again, they could go for a Constitutional emendment. That's how the system works.
     
  16. Dave1mo

    Dave1mo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Churches are the only strictly "religious" organization in this nation, and they have an exemption. There is no argument here; no church is being forced to do anything against its will.
     
  17. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure, they can talk about it, but end the end, this is clearly an issue of the Government imposing their will on a religious organization that is in conflict with that organization's beliefs.

    If the religious organization was receiving federal dollars for operations, then YES, I agree with the law. However, if the organization was completely self supporting, then NO, the law is wrong.

    This law will set a dangerous precedent. What is next? Removing all crucifixes from Catholic hospitals or telling Muslims that they can not pray on city streets?
     
  18. Dave1mo

    Dave1mo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The religious organizations enjoy tax-exempt statuses; I'd saying having to pay no taxes to the federal government is the equivalent of receiving federal subsidies.
     
  19. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ok, so we should tell Native Americans that they can no longer use peyote in their religious ceremonies?
     
  20. Dave1mo

    Dave1mo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ..........that's your argument?
     
  21. JohnnyMo

    JohnnyMo Moderator Staff Member Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2011
    Messages:
    14,715
    Likes Received:
    262
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Most people agree
     
  22. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Link for source?
     
  23. Nunya D.

    Nunya D. Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Messages:
    10,193
    Likes Received:
    2,797
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Apparently it is sufficient since you declined to dispute it.
     
  24. Dave1mo

    Dave1mo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2011
    Messages:
    4,480
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There's nothing to support. You didn't state a position, just an ambiguous sentence that's off-topic in its current form.
     
  25. Snazzmeister

    Snazzmeister New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2012
    Messages:
    221
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The left continues to make this a "denying women of their rights" issue and the right plays right into it. Universal healthcare or not, birth control is available. All quite sad really.
     

Share This Page