[Vision2020] A fine point, perhaps.

Sunil sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
Tue Jul 1 17:41:31 PDT 2014


Paul,

I'll bet I'm not the only person who found this offensive:

'Which right is being restricted, a woman's right to free contraceptives?'

Maybe people unload on you when you say things that Rush Limbaugh does. Don't put on your martyr hat when you say that and people respond.

Sunil

Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 17:23:39 -0700
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A fine point, perhaps.


  
    
  
  
    

      It's statements like these that I'm objecting to:

      

      "...of
        course it’s of no consequence to you that..."

      

      "...but
        it’s good to know you belong in the “tyranny of the bigots”
        category..."

        

        "...why
        on earth should you care that..."

      

      Are they really necessary?  Can't we discuss the issues without
      getting personal?

      

      In response to your question, when I look at my latest pay stub
      (posted for the 3rd of June), I see a line item for "Employer Contribution for Benefits". 
        It's about $350 in my case, paid by the employer per biweek. 
      I also see employer amounts for "Pre-Tax Health Savings Account"
      (their match for the amount I'm putting in my HSA), and "Long" and
      "Short Term Disability Coverage".  Also Medicare, but all
      employers have to pay FHI if I remember correctly.

      

      Paul

      

      

      On 07/01/2014 01:44 PM, Saundra Lund wrote:

    
    
      
      
      
      
      
        I
            was hoping we could actually discuss your thinking without
            you playing your predictable “why is everybody always
            picking on me” card to avoid discussing statements you make
            that you want us to just blindly accept.  I don’t think
            pointing out the flaws, limitations, and obvious conclusions
            of your thinking are personal insults, but I’m sorry if your
            sensitivities made you feel as though they were because that
            wasn’t my intention.
         
        Just
            as, I assume, you weren’t intending to personally insult
            those of us with concerns about guns on campus by calling
            our concerns “irrational fears,” or a lot of other comments
            you’ve made that might have felt like personal attacks if
            you were on the receiving end.  What’s that saying? 
            Something about people in glass houses . . . 
         
        So,
            let’s try this one point again:
         
        Paul
            wrote:
        “It's
            subsidized by everyone who pays into it, plus what the
            employer pays.”
         
        My
            response is that your statement is incorrect:
         
        “The
            last time I checked, my husband and I paid 100% of
            the cost of my health insurance through the UI, and
            that’s the way it was for all state employees the last time
            I checked.  That’s been the trend, too, with private sector
            employer-based health insurance for a number of years,
            as well as eroding the percentage of employer subsidy for
            the employee.  Indeed, there are more than a few employers
            who offer absolutely no health insurance subsidy for
            employees – their position is that their “subsidy” is
            allowing the employee the benefit of being a part of a
            larger group that gets a lower rate.”
         
        What
            say you?
         
         
        Saundra
         
        
          
            From:
                Paul Rumelhart [mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com] 

                Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 1:07 PM

                To: Saundra Lund; vision2020 at moscow.com

                Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A fine point, perhaps.
          
        
         
        
          

            Well, I was hoping we could discuss this without the
            personal insults. 

            

            Paul

            

            On 07/01/2014 12:21 PM, Saundra Lund wrote:
        
        
          Paul
              wrote:
          “It's
              subsidized by everyone who pays into it, plus what the
              employer pays.”
           
          Boy,
              you sure are out of touch with how modern employer-based
              health insurance is paid!  Keep current, Paul, rather than
              disseminate long outdated sound bites.  
           
          The
              last time I checked, my husband and I paid 100%
              of the cost of my health insurance through the UI,
              and that’s the way it was for all state employees the last
              time I checked.  That’s been the trend, too, with private
              sector employer-based health insurance for a number of
                years, as well as eroding the percentage of employer
              subsidy for the employee.  Indeed, there are more than a
              few employers who offer absolutely no health insurance
              subsidy for employees – their position is that their
              “subsidy” is allowing the employee the benefit of being a
              part of a larger group that gets a lower rate.
           
          Paul
              also wrote:
          “I
              don't see a problem with a small group of "close-knit"
              people with similar beliefs objecting to something they
              feel goes against their religious beliefs.”
           
          Of
              course you don’t, but it’s good to know you belong in the
              “tyranny of the bigots” category that thinks that anyone
              should be able to impose their religious beliefs on those
              with different beliefs, which certainly contradicts a lot
              of the positions you’ve stated on V2020.  I’m in the
              category of thinking that people are free to believe
              whatever they want, but they don’t have the right to force
              their religious beliefs on me.
           
          Too,
              why on earth should you care that about 90% of companies
              in America responsible for employing approximately 52% of
              working Americans qualify as “small closely-held”
              companies that can now use wholly false religious bigotry
              to deny access to necessary health care for female
              employees and employees with female family members?  That
              may be the America you want to live in, but it isn’t the
              one the majority of Americans want to live in.
           
          Paul
              also wrote:
          “Especially
              when the consequence is to pay for a specific
              contraceptive yourself.”
           
          Once
              again, your gender ignorance and economic insensitivity
              would be stunning had you not exhibited them so many times
              before.
           
          Yes,
              the American way is to force female crime victims to bear
              the cost of being raped by men, isn’t it, Paul, and that
              religious American ideal should be preserved at all costs,
              shouldn’t it?  It’s also the American way relegate
              “immoral” women to forced breeder status when they have
              sex, isn’t it?
           
          And,
              of course it’s of no consequence to you that the
              cost of an IUD for women for whom that form of birth
              control is most appropriate is about a month’s wage for
              lower paid employees without health insurance . . . or for
              plans that exclude coverage for women.  That may be
              economically feasible for you since you
              don’t fall into that category, but here’s a news flash for
              you:  that is as financially impossible for many women,
              particularly women who have children to feed &
              clothe.  Yet you find it appropriate for religious bigots
              to punish women & children in an attempt to coerce
              “moral” behavior out of those uppity women.
           
          Of
              course, a viable alternative might have been to
              direct those women to non-profit family planning clinics
              like Planned Parenthood where contraceptives are more
              affordable.  At least, that might have been a
              viable alternative before the Religious Right started its
              war on women.  Oops – guess that’s not a viable
              alternative for a lot of women anymore.
           
           
          Saundra
          Moscow,
              ID
           
          Our
              lives begin to end the day we become silent about things
              that matter.
          ~
              Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
           
           
           
          
            
              From:
                  vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
                  [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
                  On Behalf Of Paul Rumelhart

                  Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 9:05 AM

                  To: Sunil; vision2020 at moscow.com

                  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A fine point,
                  perhaps.
            
          
           
          
            
              Yes,
                  you're right.  It's not free.  It's subsidized by
                  everyone who pays into it, plus what the employer
                  pays.  I don't see a problem with a small group of
                  "close-knit" people with similar beliefs objecting to
                  something they feel goes against their religious
                  beliefs.  Especially when the consequence is to pay
                  for a specific contraceptive yourself.  It's not like
                  they are objecting to open-heart surgery.
            
            
               
            
            
              Is
                  having the ability to get health care in general from
                  your employer a basic human right?  Is the ability to
                  have your contraceptives in general or the "morning
                  after" pill in specific as a part of your health plan
                  offered at work a basic human right?
            
            
               
            
            
              Paul
            
            
               
            
            
              
                
                  
                      
                  From:
                      Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>

                      To: vision2020 at moscow.com
                      

                      Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 8:22 AM

                      Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A fine point,
                      perhaps.
                
                
                   
                  
                    
                      
                        Paul,

                            

                            Is your UI healthcare free or is it part of
                            your employment compensation?

                            

                            Sunil
                        
                            
                        Date:
                            Tue, 1 Jul 2014 08:03:00 -0700

                            From: godshatter at yahoo.com

                            Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A fine point,
                            perhaps.

                            To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com;
                            vision2020 at moscow.com
                        
                           
                        
                        
                          
                            
                              Which
                                  right is being restricted, a woman's
                                  right to free contraceptives?
                            
                            
                               
                            
                            
                              Paul
                            
                            
                               
                            
                            
                              
                                
                                  
                                      
                                  From:
                                      Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>

                                      To: vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
                                      

                                      Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014
                                      6:07 AM

                                      Subject: Re: [Vision2020] A
                                      fine point, perhaps.
                                
                                
                                   
                                  
                                    
                                      
                                        I
                                            couldn't disagree more. 

                                            

                                            Roe recognized a woman's
                                            right to privacy. Hobby
                                            Lobby creates religious
                                            rights for legal fictions,
                                            and restricts the rights of
                                            flesh-and-blood people. HL
                                            is not about restricting the
                                            power of government and it's
                                            naive to think that's its
                                            objective. If the government
                                            were restricting birth
                                            control, as it once did,
                                            this majority would have no
                                            objection to that exercise
                                            of government power.

                                            

                                            Sunil
                                        
                                          
                                              
                                          From: scooterd408 at hotmail.com

                                              To: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm;
                                              donaldrose at cpcinternet.com;
                                              vision2020 at moscow.com

                                              Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014
                                              01:20:24 -0600

                                              Subject: Re: [Vision2020]
                                              A fine point, perhaps.
                                          
                                             
                                          
                                          
                                            
                                              Comparing
                                                  Burwell v Hobby to Roe
                                                  v Wade I don't see
                                                  inconsistency in
                                                  rulings.  In both
                                                  cases the rulings
                                                  restricted the power
                                                  of the government.
                                              
                                                
                                                    
                                                From: v2020 at ssl1.fastmail.fm

                                                    To: donaldrose at cpcinternet.com;
                                                    vision2020 at moscow.com

                                                    Date: Mon, 30 Jun
                                                    2014 17:14:44 -0700

                                                    Subject: Re:
                                                    [Vision2020] A fine
                                                    point, perhaps.
                                                
                                                  
                                                    Great
                                                        points, Rose,
                                                        and I’m afraid I
                                                        agree with your
                                                        assessment. 
                                                        Thank you for
                                                        pointing out the
                                                        obvious even if
                                                        it’s
                                                        uncomfortable
                                                        some.
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    It’s
                                                        long past time
                                                        for SCOTUS to
                                                        have to adhere
                                                        to the same code
                                                        of ethics
                                                        federal judges
                                                        must adhere to.
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    Saundra
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    
                                                      
                                                        From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
                                                          [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
                                                          On Behalf
                                                          Of Rosemary
                                                          Huskey

                                                          Sent:
                                                          Monday, June
                                                          30, 2014 2:49
                                                          PM

                                                          To: vision2020 at moscow.com

                                                          Subject:
                                                          [Vision2020] A
                                                          fine point,
                                                          perhaps.
                                                      
                                                    
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    Bias,
                                                        or perhaps I
                                                        should say, a
                                                        predisposition,
                                                        to adopt a
                                                        certain
                                                        philosophical
                                                        approach to
                                                        legal issues may
                                                        be shaped by
                                                        private values
                                                        that we trust
                                                        and hold dear. 
                                                        In light of the
                                                         Supreme Court
                                                        decision
                                                        supporting the
                                                        Hobby Lobby
                                                        owners refusal
                                                        to provide forms
                                                        of birth control
                                                        they claim to be
                                                        at odds with
                                                        their religious
                                                        beliefs,  I
                                                        wondered if the
                                                        court was
                                                        persuaded not by
                                                        legal arguments
                                                        but by their own
                                                        religious
                                                        affiliations. 
                                                        Were any of the
                                                        five male
                                                        justices
                                                        associated with
                                                        religious groups
                                                        that  uphold the
                                                        doctrine of
                                                        patriarchy,
                                                         i.e., do they
                                                        attend churches
                                                        that deny women
                                                        ministerial or
                                                        priesthood
                                                        roles. Guess
                                                        what?  Justice
                                                        Roberts, Justice
                                                        Scalia, Justice
                                                        Thomas, and
                                                        Justice Alito
                                                        are Roman
                                                        Catholic. 
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    In
                                                        contrast, when
                                                        the decision
                                                        concerning Roe v
                                                        Wade was
                                                        announced in
                                                        1973 eight of
                                                        the nine male
                                                        justices were
                                                        members of main
                                                        stream
                                                        Protestant
                                                        churches. There
                                                        may or may not
                                                        be a direct
                                                        correlation
                                                        between religion
                                                        affiliation and
                                                        legal opinions,
                                                        but it is my
                                                        firm belief that
                                                        unearned gender
                                                        privilege
                                                        nurtured in the
                                                        cradle, and
                                                        deferred to in
                                                        the church
                                                        certainly
                                                        creates an
                                                        atmosphere that
                                                        celebrates and
                                                        bestows unique
                                                        privilege for
                                                        male members. 
                                                        And, what could
                                                        possibly more be
                                                        patriarchal than
                                                        controlling
                                                        women’s
                                                        reproductive
                                                        choices?
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                    Rose
                                                        Huskey
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                  
                                                     
                                                  
                                                
                                                

                                                    =======================================================
                                                    List services made
                                                    available by First
                                                    Step Internet,
                                                    serving the
                                                    communities of the
                                                    Palouse since 1994.
                                                    http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
                                                    =======================================================
                                              
                                            
                                          
                                          

                                              =======================================================
                                              List services made
                                              available by First Step
                                              Internet, serving the
                                              communities of the Palouse
                                              since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
                                              mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
                                              =======================================================
                                        
                                      
                                    
                                  
                                   
                                  
                                    =======================================================

                                        List services made available by
                                        First Step Internet,

                                        serving the communities of the
                                        Palouse since 1994.

                                                      http://www.fsr.net

                                                  mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

=======================================================
                                  
                                   
                                
                              
                            
                          
                        
                      
                    
                  
                   
                  
                    =======================================================

                        List services made available by First Step
                        Internet,

                        serving the communities of the Palouse since
                        1994.

                                      http://www.fsr.net

                                  mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com

=======================================================
                  
                   
                
              
            
          
          

            

            

            
          =======================================================
           List services made available by First Step Internet,
           serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
                         http://www.fsr.net
                    mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
          =======================================================
        
         
      
      

      
      

      =======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
    
    

  


=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet,
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
               http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
======================================================= 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20140701/7e8c403e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Vision2020 mailing list