Rights, Responsibilities, and Sandra Fluke

by walterm on March 11, 2012

As most of us already know, Sandra Fluke wasn’t quite the Georgetown Law student we originally envisioned, who provided her testimony before a mock hearing of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee about being “denied access” to free contraception in her insurance coverage provided by the school (which, of course, she was fully aware of before choosing to attend). As it turns out, she is a mature, seasoned, 30-year old sexual rights activist on a public interest scholarship, and is the former head of the group Georgetown University Law Students for Reproductive Justice. And now we find out that she is being represented by SKDKnickerbocker, a progressive PR agency whose managing editor just happens to be the Mao-loving communist sympathizer Anita Dunn, who is former Obama administration communications director. What a tangled web liberals do weave.

This entire matter erupted into a political firestorm because the healthcare reform law (commonly known as “ObamaCare”), which mandates that health care plans cover contraception free of charge,  does not provide an exemption for religious institutions. This was a clear violation of the First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion, since use of contraception is against the teachings of the Catholic Church. And that is why Georgetown, a private Catholic university, does not offer contraception in its healthcare plans for students. As a result of the firestorm, the Obama administration made an “accommodation” that would instead force insurance companies to offer contraception for free.  This was no compromise, because religious institutions would still have to pay the premiums, and since many are self-insured they would still pay directly for contraception against church teachings. Moreover, this is a blatantly unconstitutional mandate which forces a private company to provide a good or service that it has chosen for its own reasons not to provide. This is federal government with no limits.

Aside from the fact that the cost of contraception should be the least of Miss Fluke’s worries, since contraception is cheap, plentiful, and available for free if she can’t afford it (a glaring weakness in her argument), what boggles the mind is that she wants the federal government to coerce a religious institution to provide her and other students with free contraception, touting this as an issue of women’s health, and further arguing that free contraception is (gasp) a woman’s right. Fluke apparently believes that sex should be cost free and consequence free, and that her ardent desire for free contraception trumps both the Constitution and the teachings of the Catholic Church. Her argument is entirely an appeal to emotion, without thought to the choices that she has made as an adult. Since she chose to go to Georgetown with full knowledge of its healthcare policy, stating she was “absolutely not willing to compromise the quality of my education in exchange for my health care,” it is clear that she doesn’t believe she has to accept responsibility for either her sexual life or her choice of law school.

The Obama administration and House Democrats fully calculated that what is clearly a violation of religious freedom would be perceived by a majority of women as a matter of women’s health, where women were being “denied access to [free] contraception,” as DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz likes to argue, albeit unconvincingly. Never mind that prior to the mandate no woman was being denied access to anything available previously. The entire ruse has been to make women believe they were being denied access, and also make them believe that Republicans and Republican presidential candidates, who haven’t uttered a single word about contraception and have no position on it because it is not an issue, are championing an all-out “war on women” (another Wasserman Schultz aphorism). Aided by the media, Obama has succeeded to some degree in convincing women that if they don’t receive free contraception moving forward, then they are being denied access, and moreover, that Republicans will take away their birth control if a Republican is voted into the presidency.

The sum of this is that Sandra Fluke is just the latest cog in the liberal machine that makes absolute and unqualified claims to new welfare rights at the expense of everyone else. They make demands using the force of government for some entitled good or service, which necessarily implies another’s obligation to pay, which ends up being you.  They are completely unmoored from the Constitution, which posits that we all have a set of natural rights given to us by God (and not government), and are not based on a need or desire for something. These natural rights ward against interference with your liberties, specifically your rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Yet liberals have turned this on its ear. They argue for welfare rights that place unjustifiable claims on your liberty by making you responsible, simply because they have asserted that what are clearly wants or desires are in their view rights. Today it is contraception, but what will be next? Now we’re beginning to see what’s in the healthcare law, and we see plainly what Democrats have in store for America if liberal policies continue to advance: less freedom, and more government mandates.

If Sandra Fluke were a woman who truly sought liberty, she would keep her private sexual affairs to herself, and pay for her contraception herself. Her contraception is not my responsibility, it is not Georgetown Law School’s responsibility, and it is not your responsibility.  Sandra Fluke needs to accept responsibility for herself and not pass what is her responsibility off on you under the ruse of women’s rights. The worst part is her irresponsible assault on the Constitution has been encouraged by the President of the United States, the Democratic Party and, of course, the liberal media. She will take this entitlement mentality with her when she goes into the world as a newly minted Juris Doctor from the prestigious Georgetown Law School. Instead of gratefulness to the school and to the public (that is you) which provided her with a scholarship to attend such a great institution, she will leave Georgetown with the stain of thanklessness and contempt. And just to think what damage she will continue to do to our Constitution and to our liberties as she goes out into the world to practice law. God help us.


Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: