The Flake Fluke Compares Leukemia to Birth Control Pills

Sandra Fluke became the media darling for Liberals when she testified that it was necessary for the government (actually, taxpayers) to pay for her birth control pills. Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut” and all hell broke loose. Advertisers were pressured to pull their ads from the Rush Limbaugh show.

Fluke spoke at the Democratic National Convention pushing her birth control agenda at the taxpayers’ expense.

She’s once again speaking out about her favorite pastime by arguing that if there are religious exemptions to contraception coverage in the new healthcare law, then what would stop religious organizations and religiously identified businesses from claiming a similar exemption for a disease like leukemia?

Here’s what she said on MSNBC’s “NewsNation” with Tamron Hall:

“I think what it is important to note is that some of the folks who are continuing to object to this policy are actually worried about employers who are private companies, not religiously affiliated employers in any way, but the boss has a particular religious concern and they want to be able deny their employees particular types of healthcare.

“Now if you take a step back and think about that, that’s, you know, you work at a restaurant, you work at a store and your boss is able to deny you leukemia coverage, or contraception coverage, or blood transfusions or any number of medical concerns that someone might have a religious objection to.

“So the folks that are still objecting have some very extreme ideas about religious freedom and employee healthcare in this country.”

Let’s be clear. I don’t believe the government should be in the healthcare business in any way. Nobody should be forced to give up their money to pay for somebody else’s healthcare in the same way that nobody should be forced to pay for someone’s housing or education.

In addition, the last time I checked, being pregnant and not wanting to get pregnant are not diseases. If a woman does not want to get pregnant, she can decide not to engage in sexual activity or use a contraceptive device of her own choosing and pay for it herself. Why should I be made to pay for a person’s sexual activity and the result of that sexual activity?

No one chooses to get leukemia. No one chooses to get a blood transfusion. Yes, there are some religious groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses that do not believe in blood transfusions, but I don’t recall that business owners in the sect that already pay for insurance for their employees have made an issue of their theological stance when it comes to healthcare coverage. It’s a non-issue.

Fluke’s line of argument is typical of liberals who bring up hypothetical cases that have no bearing on the facts. If you want birth control pills, get a job and pay for them. It’s that simple, and that’s why liberals like Fluke are flakes.

[js-disqus]