The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

For discussions about religion, but not specifically Christianity.
Forum rules
For discussions about religion, but not specifically Christianity. Christians and members of any faith or of no faith are welcome, provided they treat others with respect at all times. Remember that detailed discussion about the beliefs of a particular faith will be difficult if no member of that faith is available to take part.

The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Pondero » March 8th, 2012, 5:54 pm

Sandra Fluke is a third year law student at Georgetown University who says she will have sex for money.(according to Rush Limbaugh) who called her a slut, but has since apologized for his remarks on the Air, which have caused controversy. Ms Fluke has spoken before a Congressional Committee supporting free birth control pills.

I can imagine people saying why should I as an American pay for her sexual indulgence costs!
Last edited by Pondero on March 22nd, 2012, 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
If your mind is your brain and your brain is just material , would you rely on it?
John Lennox
User avatar
Pondero
 
Posts: 12407
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Etobicoke,Ontario, Canada

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Lyn » March 8th, 2012, 7:06 pm

I didn't know you were an American Pondy.
We have free contraception here, have done so for years.
Better to pay for that than have to pay for unwanted children; I would have thought, though, in her case - if she is a professional - she will avoid pregnancy anyway. She was probably thinking of other girls when she asked for the pill to be provided free.
It all seems such a long way away from us over here in the UK, where no-one has to pay for the pill or any other birth control method (has to be said, I think we still have the highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe, something I can never understand).
Lyn
 
Posts: 45930
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:25 am

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Pondero » March 8th, 2012, 8:47 pm

Victoria Plum wrote:I didn't know you were an American Pondy.
We have free contraception here, have done so for years.
Better to pay for that than have to pay for unwanted children; I would have thought, though, in her case - if she is a professional - she will avoid pregnancy anyway. She was probably thinking of other girls when she asked for the pill to be provided free.
It all seems such a long way away from us over here in the UK, where no-one has to pay for the pill or any other birth control method (has to be said, I think we still have the highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe, something I can never understand).


i didn't say I was American, if you read it again you will see it is an ambiguous statement. Anyway, the issue of free contraception is an idea of Obama's and there is lots of opposition to it for prostitutes, but not so much for housewives I expect. Then there is the whole Catholic hospital controversy over them having to pay for.. say the hospital dishwasher's contraceptive pills, when artificial birth control - which is what contraception is - is forbidden in the Church. Remember, back in mid February, the American bishops came out with a statement, 170 of them did so, saying in part the following sentence.
"We cannot, we will not obey this unjust law."

But the Limbaugh controversy is really a ludicrous outbreak of condemnation by a liberal press against a right-wing radio talk show host. The woman in question is offended by his remarks calling her a slut, although she openly said she was willing to have sex for money.Presumably, not with any Tom,Dick or Harry, but with rich fellow law students at Georgetown University. To help her pay her tuition as a law student.
It is still going on ..now one Senator wants to ban Rush Limbaugh from broadcasting to troops on the Armed forces radio network, and CNN is still talking about it. Also, our own talk show this morning on 6:40AM radio was discussing it. And that is a right wing radio show, but they listened to some left wing types who opposed it. They got air time.
If you turn to Rush Limbaugh's website you will find him saying he hasn't lost sponsors as the left-wing media say. But, he did apologize and that should be the end of it.
If your mind is your brain and your brain is just material , would you rely on it?
John Lennox
User avatar
Pondero
 
Posts: 12407
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Etobicoke,Ontario, Canada

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Pondero » March 8th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Victoria Plum wrote.
It all seems such a long way away from us over here in the UK, where no-one has to pay for the pill or any other birth control method (has to be said, I think we still have the highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe, something I can never understand).


Melanie Phillips had a column the other day, which perhaps can answer your question. Basically, according to Melanie it is because Child allowance,regardless of financial circumstances encourages young single women to have babies. to escape poverty at home perhaps, or an abusive parent.
I know I am sticking my neck out when I start a thread like this one :grin:
If your mind is your brain and your brain is just material , would you rely on it?
John Lennox
User avatar
Pondero
 
Posts: 12407
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Etobicoke,Ontario, Canada

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Liz » March 8th, 2012, 10:05 pm

Victoria Plum wrote:It all seems such a long way away from us over here in the UK, where no-one has to pay for the pill or any other birth control method (has to be said, I think we still have the highest teen pregnancy rate in Europe, something I can never understand).


That's easy. Unlike blaming child benefit :banghead: I do think a lot of it is caused by our society's prudishness, and the wrong assumption that nudity = sexuality. There are studies that show there is a high correlation between body confidence, sexual education (which is NOT the same as promiscuity), and openness about nudity, And, low levels of teen pregnancies and low levels of unwanted pregnancies in general.

Also, there are some birth control methods you do need to pay for: condoms, and also any methods that require a prescription (rather than being given in a GP surgery). Not that that lessens your point, Vix, of course.
Liz
 
Posts: 946
Joined: November 9th, 2007, 8:36 pm

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Lyn » March 8th, 2012, 10:21 pm

Interesting reply Liz, thank you, though I am not sure I understand it but never mind. I had never thought about prudery with regards to nudity in this day and age. Doesn't everyone know what a person looks like without clothes now? When I was a kid, we didn't - not adults anyway. We speculated about what grown ups looked like :-). I remember being told that boobs (not called "boobs" then) "flopped", ie fell down to your waist, when you reached 22, hee hee. The most we ever saw was someone in a bathing costume.

I agree with you about child allowance, it is such a small amount that it would hardly be a financial incentive to have a baby. If you had several babies it would mount up of course but for one it is miniscule.

I thought condoms were free but have no idea where one would obtain them, they are on sale in shops (not expensive I think but I haven't checked, no need to at my age :-), I will have a look next time I go to the supermarket) - but presumably family planning clinics hand them out. Anything you get through your GP, like a diaphragm, carries no prescription charge, neither does the pill.

A "slut", Pondy, describes someone who doesn't care about appearance and is not hygienic about the home, it doesn't refer to sexual practice. "Slapper" might be a more accurate word. A woman who charges high rates for sex would not be a slut, she would be well turned out and super-hygienic (she might of course not bother to do the washing up or vaccuum very often but if she doesn't take people home, that wouldn't matter).
Lyn
 
Posts: 45930
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:25 am

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Pondero » March 8th, 2012, 11:26 pm

Your definition of a slut, Victoria , that you give is the British definition, a slovenly woman: a slattern, that is the second definition of two found in my Canadian Oxford Dictionary. The first, and most important definition in Canada is : a promiscuous woman, a hussy.
Now, that is what Rush Limbaugh meant when he used this derogatory noun. Limbaugh is American.
If your mind is your brain and your brain is just material , would you rely on it?
John Lennox
User avatar
Pondero
 
Posts: 12407
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Etobicoke,Ontario, Canada

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby GregB » March 9th, 2012, 8:22 am

Wikipedia has an interesting article about the term 'slut', with its etymology, history, usage, etc. The connotations of a woman of loose sexual morals did, it's true, come later than its use to describe a slatternly, unclean woman, but I think the two really go together in the minds of most people - ie. a slovenly woman is likely to have a slovenly view of sex, too.

I don't think Rush Limbaugh need have apologised for calling a whore, no matter how 'high class' and personally clean and whatever her personal motives, a 'slut'. As a woman who uses her body promiscuously and for money, that's precisely what she is, in my view at least.

Talking of unnecessary apologies, I think it was wrong (though characteristic) of Obama to apologise to the Afghan president for the burning of some copies of the Koran (which was apparently by accident, anyway.) The usual sickening reaction, when mobs of enraged Muslim fanatics went on the rampage, killing several Americans, should not have been met with a craven, grovelling apology from the American president, who should, on the contrary, have condemned in no uncertain terms the psychotic reaction of these members of 'the religion of peace' (sic.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slut
"The war of peoples will be more terrible than those of kings."
- Winston Churchill (1901)
User avatar
GregB
 
Posts: 15464
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:23 am
Location: Barcelona, Spain

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Sprocket » March 9th, 2012, 9:42 am

The older word for 'slut', until the mid-19th Century, was 'jade', a fact of which those parents who name their daughters 'Jade' are presumably unaware. It's a popular girl's name nowadays in the U.K. :roll:
The idiot who, in railway carriages, talks on a mobile phone
We only suffer to ride on the buffer of a Virgin Train, alone.
W.S.Gilbert, modernised.
User avatar
Sprocket
 
Posts: 15782
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:21 am
Location: Hemel Hempstead, Herts.

Re: The Sandra Fluke Controversy.

Postby Pondero » March 9th, 2012, 12:24 pm

I don't think lack of nudity, in everyday life has anything to do with an increase in unwed mothers. The fact German girls have been sunning their bare breasts for years does not account for lower births in that country.I can't think of any country where men and women walk about completely naked.
Melanie Phillips is right, Child Benefit money does account for early pregnancies amongst the unmarried females.I also believe that these young girls who probably aren't doing well at school, and see no future, and perhaps no man for life in a marriage decide to make hay while the sun shines.They don't want a job cleaning offices or in a factory. I feel sorry for them in a way.
There is another factor at play here too. The overt sexuality saturated society which despises virginity and admires sexual activity.They are brought up with it and cannot escape it.
Last edited by Pondero on March 9th, 2012, 2:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If your mind is your brain and your brain is just material , would you rely on it?
John Lennox
User avatar
Pondero
 
Posts: 12407
Joined: October 25th, 2007, 11:03 am
Location: Etobicoke,Ontario, Canada

Next

Return to Talking Stick

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest