Sandra's really Fluked up logic

From Cassy Fiano Chesser:

Sandra Fluke

Sandra Fluke equates birth control pills to leukemia treatment

Sandra Fluke has become increasingly irrelevant after her one, brief moment in the spotlight, where she whined about having to pay for her own birth control. Since then, become more and more irrelevant, drawing crowds of a whopping ten people.

She must have missed the attention, as she’s come roaring back with yet another absurd claim: birth control coverage is the same thing as coverage for treating leukemia!

More at the link.

Mrs Chesser, who knows something about sex herself, being the mother of two children, and is Camp Lejeune’s military wife spouse of the year, pointed out that there is an absolutely free form of contraception available to anyone: don’t have sex.

Now, I do not care if the lovely Miss Fluke has sexual intercourse or uses artificial contraception; that’s her business, not mine.1 Why Miss Fluke seems to think she should make it everybody’s business, by attempting to use the power of government to compel everyone to pay for her contraception, seems somewhat at odds with the (supposedly) liberal position that it’s none of our business what people do in their bedrooms,2 but I digress.

Leukemia is a horrible disease, and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to treat; as was noted at the time the lovely Miss Fluke first came to public attention, the Target pharmacy three miles from the Georgetown Law Center, where she was a student, was selling a generic brand of oral contraceptives for a whopping $9 a month to women who did not have health insurance. The need for health insurance to cover artificial contraception seems somewhat different from the need for health insurance to cover leukemia.

What about toothpaste? Your Editor had to take a break in the middle of writing this article to take the spare daughter to work, and he stopped by the Giant Food Mart on Route 443 to pick up some items. While there, he checked the price of toothpaste and toothbrushes (teethbrush?) A 6 ounce tube of Arm & Hammer Advance White toothpaste was priced at $3.49, while a pack of two Oral-B teethbrush (one for my darling bride and one for me) was $4.49. If we use two tubes of toothpaste and each get one new teethbrush a month, that would come out to $11.47 a month, and taking care of your teeth is just as important as contraception; you don’t take care of your teeth and they rot out of your head, causing all sorts of unpleasant medical problems.

More, dental care is a much longer-term issue. You have to take care of your teeth from when you are a very small child through pretty much the day you die; contraception is a concern for a much smaller portion of the average person’s lifetime.

If contraception is just so important that it simply has to be paid for by insurance — with no co-payments — then why shouldn’t the federal government mandate that our health insurance coverage pay for our toothpaste and toothbrushes? After all, it costs us more, over a longer period of our lives, than contraception.

Of course, most people would see that as silly, and it was meant to be just that, a reductio ad absurdum. Yet, for someone like Sandra Fluke, someone apparently intelligent enough to be accepted into Georgetown University’s law school,3 it’s just impossible to imagine that men and women could somehow, someway, be just as responsible, on their own, for taking care of contraception as we expect them to be in taking care of their teeth.

  1. Though some people might suggest that it would be a far, far better thing for our country if Miss Fluke did not reproduce! However, Robert Stacey Stacy McCain noted that the problem is too much contraception, and that we really need to start making more babies. I wonder if he’d make an exception in his argument in Miss Fluke’s case.
  2. I say supposedly liberal position, because, despite the claims of our friends on the left, that isn’t their position in the slightest. They say that is their position, but then they do everything in their power to tell us just what they do in their bedrooms, and with whom, and then tell us that it’s none of our business.
  3. Something which surely tarnishes the reputation of that fine school.

Comments are closed.