<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6002.18552" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Roger normally has some "restricted vision" views,
but I never would have expected him to buy into this particular jingoistic
idiocy. I thought he was too able to reason through issues. guess I was
wrong....or I was just too willing to give the benefit of the doubt to an
otherwise pretty good guy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Debi R-S</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com
href="mailto:donovanjarnold2005@yahoo.com">Donovan Arnold</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=lfalen@turbonet.com
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen</A> ; <A title=thansen@moscow.com
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">Tom Hansen</A> ; <A
title=Vision2020@moscow.com href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Moscow Vision
2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 02, 2012 8:21
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Say What?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; BACKGROUND-COLOR: #fff">
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Roger reasons,</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">"The problem is why should
the taxpayer foot the bill. Or for that matter any religious group that
opposes it (contraception) on ground that it is against ther
belief."</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> <VAR
id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR></DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">It is against my religion
to bomb people overseas for oil and greedy <SPAN id=misspell-1
style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>billionaires</SPAN></SPAN> to maintain an
extravagant lifestyle. Why should I have to pay for that? Why don't the people
that want to start needless wars simply chip in and do
it themselves and leave taxes to just things every single person in the
United States agrees to purchase?</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">It is isn't reasonable,
that's why. The reality is pregnancy and not getting <SPAN id=misspell-2
style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>pregnant</SPAN></SPAN> are medical and economic
issues that need to be covered because it impacts everyone. For a company
to just cover men's medical issues and not women's is sexist and <SPAN
id=misspell-3 style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>immoral</SPAN></SPAN>. If we simply
allowed companies to choose which medical expenses to cover for women, women
would not have the same job and <SPAN id=misspell-4
style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>educational</SPAN></SPAN> opportunities as men. It
would only be a denial of a person's religious beliefs if they were personally
forced to participate in the event, or not event in this case. A <SPAN
id=misspell-1 style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>conscientious</SPAN></SPAN> <SPAN
id=misspell-2 style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN>objector</SPAN></SPAN> in
wartime isn't forced to pick up a gun and shoot someone, but they are
still required to pay their taxes that supports something they disagree
with. The government isn't making a choice, or forcing a decision
for a woman, it is in fact giving her the choice to follow or not follow what
she and her doctor feel is best for her medical and economic
health.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Donovan Arnold</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif">
<DIV
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif">
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV class=hr contentEditable=false
style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; MARGIN: 5px 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; PADDING-TOP: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; HEIGHT: 0px"
readonly="true"></DIV><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B>
lfalen <lfalen@turbonet.com><BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Tom Hansen
<thansen@moscow.com>; Moscow Vision 2020 <Vision2020@moscow.com>
<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Friday, March 2, 2012
6:29 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re:
[Vision2020] Say What?<BR></FONT></DIV><BR>I do not have a problem with
contraception. The problem is why should the taxpayer foot the bill. Or for
that matter any religious group that opposes it on ground that it is against
ther belief. Obama's accommodation does not change that. It is still a matter
of the government forcing their will on people. Freedom of religion is still
being trampled. If anyone desires birth control regardless of who the work
for, they can pay for it or by an insurance policy on their on that covers
it.<BR>Roger<BR>-----Original message-----<BR>From: Tom Hansen <A
href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">thansen@moscow.com</A><BR>Date: Fri, 02
Mar 2012 13:57:40 -0800<BR>To: Moscow Vision 2020 <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>Subject:
[Vision2020] Say What?<BR><BR>> “What does it say about the college co-ed
Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says
that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a
slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex.
She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and
me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the
pimps.”<BR>> <BR>> - Rush Limbaugh<BR>>
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2012/03/rush_limbaugh_calls_woman_on_bhtml<BR>>
<BR>> ------------<BR>> <BR>> Sandra Fluke's testimony before
congress (in its entirety)<BR>>
http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/02/23/transcript-sandra-fluke-testifies-on-why-women-should-be-allowed-access-to-contraception-and-reproductive-health-care/<BR>>
<BR>> “My name is Sandra Fluke, and I’m a third-year student at Georgetown
Law School. I’m also a past-president of Georgetown Law Students for
Reproductive Justice or LSRJ. And I’d like to acknowledge my fellow LSRJ
members and allies and all of the student activists with us and thank them so
much for being here today.<BR>> <BR>> “We, as Georgetown LSRJ, are
here today because we’re so grateful that this regulation implements the
non-partisan medical advice of the Institute of Medicine.<BR>> <BR>> “I
attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraceptive coverage in its
student health plan. And just as we students have faced financial, emotional,
and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously-affiliated hospitals
and institutions and universities across the country have suffered similar
burdens.<BR>> <BR>> “We are all grateful for the new regulation that
will meet the critical health care needs of so many women.<BR>> <BR>>
“Simultaneously, the recently announced adjustment addresses any potential
conflict with the religious identity of Catholic or Jesuit
institutions.<BR>> <BR>> “When I look around my campus, I see the faces
of the women affected by this lack of contraceptive coverage.<BR>>
<BR>> “And especially in the last week, I have heard more and more of their
stories. On a daily basis, I hear yet from another woman from Georgetown or
from another school or who works for a religiously-affiliated employer, and
they tell me that they have suffered financially and emotionally and medically
because of this lack of coverage.<BR>> <BR>> “And so, I’m here today to
share their voices, and I want to thank you for allowing them – not me – to be
heard.<BR>> <BR>> “Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you
know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school. For a lot of students
who, like me, are on public interest scholarships, that’s practically an
entire summers salary. 40% of the female students at Georgetown Law reported
to us that they struggle financially as a result of this policy.<BR>>
<BR>> “One told us about how embarrassed and just powerless she felt when
she was standing at the pharmacy counter and learned for the first time that
contraception was not covered on her insurance and she had to turn and walk
away because she couldn’t afford that prescription. Women like her have no
choice but to go without contraception.<BR>> <BR>> “Just last week, a
married female student told me that she had to stop using contraception
because she and her husband just couldn’t fit it into their budget anymore.
Women employed in low-wage jobs without contraceptive coverage face the same
choice.<BR>> <BR>> “And some might respond that contraception is
accessible in lots of other ways. Unfortunately, that’s just not true.<BR>>
<BR>> “Women’s health clinic provide a vital medical service, but as the
Guttmacher Institute has definitely documented, these clinics are unable to
meet the crushing demand for these services. Clinics are closing, and women
are being forced to go without the medical care they need.<BR>> <BR>>
“How can Congress consider the [Rep. Jeff] Fortenberry (R-Neb.), [Sen. Marco]
Rubio (R-Fla.) and [Sen. Roy] Blunt (R-Mo.) legislation to allow even more
employers and institutions to refuse contraception coverage and then respond
that the non-profit clinics should step up to take care of the resulting
medical crisis, particularly when so many legislators are attempting to
de-fund those very same clinics?<BR>> <BR>> “These denial of
contraceptive coverage impact real people.<BR>> <BR>> “In the worst
cases, women who need these medications for other medical conditions suffer
very dire consequences.<BR>> <BR>> “A friend of mine, for example,
has polycystic ovarian syndrome, and she has to take prescription birth
control to stop cysts from growing on her ovaries. Her prescription is
technically covered by Georgetown’s insurance because it’s not intended to
prevent pregnancy.<BR>> “Unfortunately, under many religious institutions
and insurance plans, it wouldn’t be. There would be no exception for other
medical needs. And under Sen. Blunt’s amendment, Sen. Rubio’s bill or Rep.
Fortenberry’s bill there’s no requirement that such an exception be made for
these medical needs.<BR>> <BR>> “When this exception does exist, these
exceptions don’t accomplish their well-intended goals because when you let
university administrators or other employers rather than women and their
doctors dictate whose medical needs are legitimate and whose are not, women’s
health takes a back seat to a bureaucracy focused on policing her
body.<BR>> <BR>> “In 65% of the cases at our school, our female students
were interrogated by insurance representatives and university medical staff
about why they needed prescription and whether they were lying about their
symptoms.<BR>> <BR>> “For my friend and 20% of the women in her
situation, she never got the insurance company to cover her prescription.
Despite verifications of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied
repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent
pregnancy. She’s gay. So clearly polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more
urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.<BR>> <BR>> “After
months paying over $100 out-of-pocket, she just couldn’t afford her medication
anymore, and she had to stop taking it.<BR>> <BR>> “I learned about all
of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that in the
middle of the night in her final exam period she’d been in the emergency room.
She’d been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to
me, ‘It was so painful I’d woke up thinking I’ve been shot.’<BR>> <BR>>
“Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis
ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire
ovary as a result.<BR>> <BR>> “On the morning I was originally scheduled
to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor’s office, trying to cope
with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.<BR>> <BR>> “Since
last year’s surgery, she’s been experiencing night sweats and weight gain and
other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary.
She’s 32-years-old.<BR>> <BR>> “As she put it, ‘If my body indeed does
enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to
help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her
desperately desired grandbabies simply because the insurance policy that I
paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school, wouldn’t cover my prescription
for birth control when I needed it.’<BR>> <BR>> “Now, in addition to
potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at
such an early age – increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis –
she may never be able to conceive a child.<BR>> <BR>> “Some may say that
my friend’s tragic story is rare. Its not. I wish it were<BR>> “One woman
told us doctors believe she has endometriosis, but that can’t be proven
without surgery. So the insurance has not been willing to cover her medication
– the contraception she needs to treat her endometriosis.<BR>> <BR>>
“Recently, another woman told me that she also has polycystic ovarian syndrome
and she’s struggling to pay for her medication and is terrified to not have
access to it.<BR>> <BR>> “Due to the barriers erected by Georgetown’s
policy, she hasn’t been reimbursed for her medications since last
August.<BR>> <BR>> “I sincerely pray that we don’t have to wait until
she loses an ovary or is diagnosed with cancer before her needs and the needs
of all of these women are taken seriously.<BR>> <BR>> “Because this is
the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends: A woman’s
reproductive health care isn’t a necessity, isn’t a priority.<BR>> <BR>>
“One woman told us that she knew birth control wasn’t covered on the insurance
and she assumed that that’s how Georgetown’s insurance handle all of women’s
reproductive and sexual health care. So when she was raped, she didn’t go to
the doctor, even to be examined or tested for sexually transmitted infections,
because she thought insurance wasn’t going to cover something like that –
something that was related to a woman’s reproductive health.<BR>> “As one
other student put it: ‘This policy communicates to female students that our
school doesn’t understand our needs.’<BR>> <BR>> “These are not feelings
that male fellow student experience and they’re not burdens that male students
must shoulder.<BR>> <BR>> “In the media lately, some conservative
Catholic organizations have been asking what did we expect when we enroll in a
Catholic school?<BR>> <BR>> “We can only answer that we expected women
to be treated equally, to not have our school create untenable burdens that
impede our academic success.<BR>> <BR>> “We expected that our schools
would live up to the Jesuit creed of cura personalis‘ – to care for the whole
person by meeting all of our medical needs.<BR>> <BR>> “We
expected that when we told our universities of the problem this policy created
for us as students, they would help us.<BR>> <BR>> “We expected that
when 94% of students oppose the policy the university would respect our
choices regarding insurance students pay for – completely unsubsidized by the
university.<BR>> <BR>> “We did not expect that women would be told in
the national media that we should have gone to school elsewhere.<BR>>
<BR>> “And even if that meant going to a less prestigious university, we
refuse to pick between a quality education and our health. And we resent that
in the 21st century, anyone think it’s acceptable to ask us to make this
choice simply because we are women.<BR>> <BR>> “Many of the women whose
stories I’ve shared today are Catholic women. So ours is not a war against the
church. It is a struggle for the access to the health care we need.<BR>>
<BR>> “The President of the Association of Jesuit Colleges has shared that
Jesuit colleges and the universities appreciate the modifications to the rule
announced recently. Religious concerns are addressed and women get the health
care they need. And I sincerely hope that that is something we can all agree
upon.<BR>> <BR>> “Thank you very much.”<BR>> <BR>>
-----------------------------------------<BR>> <BR>> Seeya later,
Moscow.<BR>> <BR>> Tom Hansen<BR>> Post Falls, Idaho<BR>> <BR>>
"If not us, who?<BR>> If not now, when?"<BR>> <BR>> - Unknown<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> <BR>>
<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>serving the communities of
the Palouse since 1994.<BR> <A
href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since
1994.<BR>
http://www.fsr.net<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>=======================================================</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>