We see that she's able to speak and (presumably) dress herself, so she can't possibly be as mentally challenged as she sounds here, can she?
I guess she's saying that abortions facilitate sex for women in the same way that Viagra facilitates sex for men? Well then, let there be unlimited Viagra and abortions for all! This is supposed to be a free country, right?
Text:
BOXER: There’s nothing in this amendment that says if a man some days wants to buy Viagra, for example, that his pharmaceutical coverage cannot cover it, that he has to buy a rider. I wouldn’t support that. And they shouldn’t support going after a woman using her own private funds for her reproductive health care. Is it fair to say to a man you’re going to have to buy a rider to buy Viagra and this will be public information that could be accessed? No, I don’t support that. I support a man’s privacy, just as I support a woman’s privacy. (Courtesy of ACLL)Aside from the absurd equivalence of abortion with Viagra, this raises the question: will Viagra be covered under a public option? I'm not crazy about the idea of paying for some guy's prescription. If this is such a private matter, couldn't he pay for it himself?
Maybe Sen. Boxer should have included treatment of STDs in her analogy. That would make more sense to President Obama, who, you may recall, sees babies and venereal diseases as equivalent punishments:
“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby. I don’t want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn’t make sense to not give them information.”More at Memeorandum.
Most recent posts here.


9 comments: