Sandra Fluke: Insurance Must Cover Transgender Mutilation

“Sandra Fluke is not what she is being sold as. Instead she is a liberal activist pushing some rather radical ideas. Keep that in mind as the left holds her up in the spotlight.” So says Stephen Gutowski, who made a discovery about the random Georgetown co-ed who testified on behalf of that new victim class: downtrodden profligates. The discovery Mr. Gutowski made is that…

She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if “gender reassignment” surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.

Read more…

The thought that our society is governed by men who take this foolishness seriously is a pox on our nation. It’s Sandra Fluke — and the depraved libertines who are using her — that should apologize.

  • Amber Thompson

    I for one am tired of you, shoving your religion into my face.

  • On the other hand, Amber, some people are sick of sexual libertines shoving your libido bills into their accounts payable. But while reading our web site is optional for you, paying for other people’s contraception is not an option under Obamacare.

  • Nikki H

    Excuse me but wasn’t it Rush Limbaugh who called Sandra Fluke a slut and suggested she put videos of her having sex on You Tube, not vice versa ? I think Limbaugh should be ashamed of himself as should the jerk that wrote this article. The only people that will benefit from denial of insurance benefits is the Insurance Company. Rest assured that your premium will not be reduced if benefits are denied or reduced. Also, this more than likely will have the effect of producing more unwanted pregnancies because men will refuse to use a condom and women will be persuaded to have sex without protection…hence more abortions. Is that what you want because that’s what you’;re going to get.
    As far as Transgender mutilations comment, it displays your complete ignorance of Gender Identity Disorder as a medical diagnosis. What percentage of the population is transsexual?  Maybe 0.01%..  Of that 0.01% only a relatively small percentage decide to have Gender Reassignment Surgery. The economic impact is negligible but the benefit to the Trans person is life changing. It reduces costs for mental health treatment because in over 90% of cases these people function fine and are no longer clinically depressed or require disability and social welfare programs. In other words, your theory of additional medical expenses are very short sighted as well and extremely uncompassionate.

  •  Your statements presume the nonsense that Planned Parenthood disseminates along with their ineffective birth control. Steve Mosher, of the Population Research Institute has some good information here, that will debunk some of your and Sandra Fluke’s preconceived (no pun intended!) notions:

    http://www.pop.org/content/head-catholic-nonprofit-explains-why-my-employees-dont-want-free-birth-control

    Contraception leads to abortion. Planned Parenthood knows this. In fact, their business model depends on it. That’s why they hand out lots of “free” contraception.

    Could you point our readers to the scientific studies that support your contention that once people are chemically or surgically mutilated they are in better mental health? In other words, where does your 90% figure come from?

    There are studies that show homosexuals to be physically and mentally far worse off than heterosexuals. I would be quite surprised to learn that sexually mutilated people are mentally better off.

  • schmenz

    “Excuse me but wasn’t it Rush Limbaugh who called Sandra Fluke a slut…”, says Nikki.
    Nikki, I don’t know if you are making a serious contribution to the subject being discussed or not (the tone of your response seems to suggest that you are not) but let me say this about the characterization of Mizzz Fluke by Limbaugh: if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…it’s a duck.

  • Astrid

    Mr. Limbaugh did apologize for his comment, which he admits was indeed insulting and therefore regrettable. The link on the word ‘apologize’ in the article discussed above takes you to his apology, and explanation for same. It’s understandable that someone who was insulted by the article wouldn’t bother to use all the links in it. His explanation is quite humbling to read, and I think we would all do well to read it, and try to put it into practice. We win nothing, and lose much, for our false zeal when we hurl insults at people we should be trying to understand better and hopefully help.

    It’s true that contraception leads to more abortion because when it fails, abortion is seen as the only ‘choice’. Nobody in their right mind wants more teen pregnancies, but the left believes that sex is inevitable and unavoidable. That would make us no different from animals that way, and that would be false. I think this animal mentality in the left seems to be asking for these kinds of insults, but we shouldn’t lower ourselves and give them any!

  • “Could you point our readers to the scientific studies that support your
    contention that once people are chemically or surgically mutilated they
    are in better mental health?”

    Mutilated? No. Have body anatomically aligned with brain?

    This meta-study mentions quite a few.
    Sex
    Reassignment. Thirty Years of International Follow-up Studies After Sex
    Reassignment Surgery: A Comprehensive Review, 1961-1991 Friedemann Pfäfflin, Astrid Junge (Translated from German into American English by Roberta B. Jacobson and Alf B. Meier)

    The treatment of adolescent transsexuals: changing insights. Cohen-Ketternis et al, J Sex Med. 2008 Aug;5(8):1892-7.

    Professionals who take responsibility for these youth and
    are willing to help should yet be fully aware of the impact of their
    interventions. In this article, the pros and cons of the various
    approaches to youngsters with GID are presented, hopefully inciting a
    sound scientific discussion of the issue.I’m glad the you talked about “improvement”, “better mental health” rather than expecting perfection. When Catholic journals tell them they should have died rather than do this (See the article “When the rubber meets the road”), when they get rejected by Church, Family. Employers, when they suffer homelessness and assault at apalling rates.. yes, they still have issues. As would anyone else so persecuted.

  • L

    My comment on the article:

    For your information the US government was forced to recognize sex reassignment surgery as medically necessary in a court of law (O’Donnabhain vs the IRS).  So the fact Sandra Fluke is pushing this issue is not some crazy leftist plot.  It is in fact mainstream medical issue in today’s society.  The problem is this author and many others on the religious right want to believe we still live ion the 1950’s.  We don’t.  Transsexualism has been proven to be a congenital birth condition.  And like anyone else with a birth condition transsexual people should be allowed to correct theirs.  Further, it is not out of the question that insurance should help pay for correction of said birth condition.It’s the 21st century folks, please educate yourselves.

  •  Zoe: Do those studies back up the claim that “in over 90% of cases these people function fine and are no longer
    clinically depressed or require disability and social welfare programs”? That’s the question I asked Nikki H.

    What I’ve seen indicates that there’s way less certitude on the supposed benefits of mutilation:

    http://www.susans.org/reference/lothsrs.html

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2004/jul/30/health.mentalhealth

    The NARTH site has many studies on this issue. I recommend this one:

    http://narth.com/docs/desiresch.html

  • schmenz

    “Transsexualism has been proven to be a congenital birth condition.”

    Proven by who?  When?  Under what circumstances?  Citations, please.

    Historically obtuse comments about wanting “to believe we still live in the 1950s” are not particularly helpful in a discussion of something like this, so if you can do better than that please do so.  What is quite interesting to me is the willingness of some normal, intelligent people to take leave of their senses so completely when sexual perversions are discussed.  That might be an interesting topic for a future book.

    This whole silly argument is akin to the one which posits that homosexuals are “born that way” (an even funnier one is the one about the lesbian elephants).  No, they are not born that way.  That canard has given rise to that slippery expression “sexual orientation”, a very clever but transparent attempt to give a scientific veneer to mortal sin.  Is one “born” a rapist?  A felon?  A wife beater?  An adulterer?  A murderer?  To ask the question is to answer it.  Yet some people who would  sensibly reject a notion so ludicrous that one is “born” a murderer is  very happy to believe that he can be born a sodomite or a transvestite.  Such taking leave of one’s senses is truly weird.

    As one unnamable aberration after another is lionized by Hollywood and stamped into law by our increasingly tyrannical and murderous government and given a note of respectability by scientists on the take of the Feds (in the form of grants) and shoved down our throats by the media, the more common sense seems to vanish.  The Church has always said that when divorce is accepted all manner of evils will soon present themselves: contraception (and, in my opinion, its Catholic version, NFP), broken homes, acceptance of buggery, abortion, etc.  But it seems even the Church didn’t predict another effect of this: a sort of mass insanity among the public.

    For what else can explain it?  

  • Astrid

    Schmenz, does a reasonable person take such offense over being accused of living in the past? Does he take such offense that he hurls a much worse accusation against his offender by calling him a silly pervert, comparable to a rapist, or murderer?

  • schmenz

    Dear Astrid:

    With all due respect, could you please re-read my comment and try again?  I do not know what point you are trying to make to me.

  • Astrid

    If you read the links in Brother Andre’s posts on this subject it might familiarize you with these people you see as nothing more than perverts.

  • schmenz

    Dear Astrid:

    When you decide to point out the specific areas of disagreement we have based on my earlier comment I will be more than happy to respond as best I can.

  • Anon

    bother to read Ms Fluke’s testimony? No? Think she said that birth control should be covered so that people like her could have consequence free sex? She didn’t; she told a stor of a friend with polycystic ovarian disorder whose insurance denied birth control because its “not medically necessary” and as a result of this lack of control of her disorder, ended up having to have major surgery to remove a tennis ball sized cyst from her ovaries. So if standing up for people when they are in need makes you a slut, i guess the beatitudes calls on all of us to be streetwalkers…

  • schmenz

    From the online edition of the Wall Street Journal:

        Another interesting aspect of Ms. Fluke’s testimony is that so much of it — about a third — concerned the use of birth control pills not as contraception but as a treatment for polycystic ovarian syndrome. The Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome Association lists birth control pills as one treatment for PCOS, but it lists a lot of other treatments, too, including in-vitro fertilization, anti-androgens, and insulin sensitizers. The birth control pills are the only treatment for the syndrome that the government wants to make free to consumers, or that Ms. Fluke emphasized in her testimony. It’s not clear why that treatment should get preference over other ones.

  • Astrid

    In her testimony she says she is a past president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice. 

  • Astrid

    Her testimony also says she’s only fighting for the same free contraceptions that faculty and staff already have. Given this fact, it’s easy to see why there is this confusion among the Liberals as to why Catholics are complaining.