ONTD Political

Washington — Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke was given her chance to talk to Congress Thursday, even though lawmakers were on a break and just a few Democratic allies were there to cheer her on.

But what a difference a week makes.

Last Thursday the Republican-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee rejected Democrats' request that Fluke testify on the Obama administration's policy requiring that employees of religion-affiliated institutions have access to health insurance that covers birth control.

This week she received almost rock-star treatment as the lone witness at an unofficial Democratic-sponsored hearing. While the rest of the Capitol was mostly empty, Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, three other Democrats and dozens of mainly young women supporters crowded into a House office building room to applaud Fluke as she spoke of the importance of reproductive health care to women.

Prominently displayed by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., was a photo of five religious leaders, all men and all appearing at the invitation of the Republican majority, testifying last week with Fluke visible in the background, sitting in the visitors' section.


Democrats pounced on that image of a hearing discussing contraceptive rights being dominated by men while the one person Democrats had asked to appear on the witness stand, a woman, was turned away. Pelosi, D-Calif., said they had since heard from 300,000 people urging that women's voices be heard on the issue.

"We almost ought to thank the chairman for the lack of judgment he had," in denying a seat to Fluke, Pelosi said.

Committee chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif., had said at last week's hearing that the panel's focus was on whether the administration policy was a violation of religious freedom. He said at the time that Fluke, invited by Democrats in her capacity as former head of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice, was not qualified to speak on the religious rights question.

"I'm an American woman who uses contraceptives," Fluke said, when asked Thursday by Rep. Elijah Cummings, D-Md., about her qualifications to speak on the issue.


The Health and Human Services Department ruled earlier this year that, under the new health care law, religious-affiliated institutions such as hospitals and universities must include free birth control coverage in their employee health plans.

That raised a storm of protests from Catholic leaders and other groups that disapprove of contraception on religious grounds. Two weeks ago President Barack Obama modified that policy so that insurance companies, and not the organization affiliated with a church, would pay for birth control coverage.

The religious leaders at last week's hearing said that Obama's concession was too little. Republicans in the House and Senate are pushing legislation to let insurance plans opt out of any mandate on contraception coverage if they have moral objections.

Fluke, a third-year law student, said that Georgetown Law, a Jesuit institution, does not provide contraception coverage in its student health plan and that contraception can cost a woman more than $3,000 during law school. She spoke of a friend who had an ovary removed because the insurance company wouldn't cover the prescription birth control she needed to stop the growth of cysts.
--

source

Fluke was interviewed right after on MSNBC, they asked basically if it was the student's fault that they chose to attend a religious university that opposes birth control. She didn't blink and stated(to the best of my memory) "I chose the university that was the best for my education. Women should not have to choose between education and healthcare." Rock on. How horrible is congress that she had to speak during a break when everyone was gone.
missmurchison 24th-Feb-2012 03:09 am (UTC)
But prescription birth control is a good choice for women who are monogamous. Otherwise, they should be using condoms, possibly combined with another form of BC. (Condoms + foam = excellent protection against pregnancy)

Those married Republican women should know that, even if their husbands don't.
darsynia 24th-Feb-2012 03:15 am (UTC)
Oh definitely! I'd (married, albeit not Republican) be on it right now if there wasn't a nearly-to-be-born baby in there, heh.

I guess I sounded less cynical than I meant to be--I just get this impression that a good deal of the women legislators voting for this stuff are either always party line, or they view contraception as something other women use... or that they could do without it if they had to. The truth is probably something stranger, though.

It's just been a particularly bad couple of months in regards to religious conservatives of my acquaintance. One very close friend was off of birth control thanks to a doctor's recommendation that she 'couldn't possibly get pregnant' while being treated for something else, and now has a baby as a result--and she's applauding our alma mater college for 'taking a stand' against having to provide contraception for their employees. I KNOW she used contraception, and that she's upset that her doctor was wrong, but she still wants to take that choice away to some extent, and it just mystifies me.
missmurchison 24th-Feb-2012 03:23 am (UTC)
I've read stories by abortion clinic workers about protesters who came in on days when there were no protests, had an abortion, only to show up outside again a few days later, waving pictures of fetuses. Their attitude was, "But I'm having an abortion for a valid reason. These other women are just sluts."

I can't begin to understand.
missmurchison 24th-Feb-2012 03:37 am (UTC)
Thanks! I'm bookmarking that for the next time someone refuses to believe me about this.
This page was loaded Aug 28th 2014, 11:06 am GMT.