Quote:

Bill Maher makes money by calling Sarah Palin a cunt.

There is actually a difference. It's kind of like Chris Rock using the n-word versus you calling a bunch of black people names that they find offensive for doing things that they normally do.

Selective liberal outrage. It's a beautiful thing, eh? Bill Maher makes money by calling Sarah Palin a cunt. Rush Limbaugh observes that this cheap tramp (hey...she's going through three grand a year for condoms, IUDs, the Pill and whatnot, so clearly something's going on here ;-) may be suffering a bit from what we used to call "looseness" and the mockrage on the part of folks like you begins.

Let's examine your logic a little bit.

Clearly, there's a link between spending money on contraceptives and actual sexual activity.

HOWEVER

There is no real link between spending money on the birth control pill and actual sexual activity. For example, participants in this very thread have explained how many women need the pill to fix or manager specific health issues related to hormones. In these cases, a woman could be completely 100% celibate and still have a need for the pill 12 months of the year.

So this is clearly a big leap when we go from the fact that someone needs to pay for the pill, to the idea that this makes them sexually promiscuous. There's nothing that this sort of expense says about a person other than the fact that they're female.

If we add in condoms - this starts to imply that the person IS sexually active, or at least plans to be at some point. However it says nothing about the number of sexual partners that person has or plans to have. Most intelligent women know that the pill is not 100% effective - a backup plan is clearly smart. The most common backup plan in 2012 is using condoms.

A woman who chooses to buy the pill AND condoms may or may not be sexually active, if they are sexually active, may or may not have more than one partner over the course of a year.

Would you really call a woman who has one partner promiscuous? Or are you actually assuming that women who make intelligent, conservative choices when it comes to sexual health deserve to be called names and ridiculed?

I'll give chainpin a pass on this one because we all know he's just a fucking moron. But the rest of you... logic, people.

First off this lady is an activist. So she is playing up the false lack of access vs the real availability. If she truly did not have an ability to pay for contraception, she could go to free health clinics where contraception is readily available. If it were for health reason, like the one she posed a strawman arugment for, she could obtain generic oral contraception from any corner pharmacy for 10 bucks. This isn't about access. This is about here wanting her cake and eating it to. She chose to go to the prestigious Georgetown University, a Catholic Institution. They do not provide that service as it is against their beliefs. She is a feminist who has a problem with that. My answer is, go to another law school. But since you have a scholarship there, you should be gratful. Maybe she, like most liberals, is just another elitist snobs. To good to go to the health clinic where the services are provided. She probably doesn't want to spend time in line with the riff raff they claim to passionately defend.

I'm just saying, if you're going to try to 'tweak' people, at least do it in a way that isn't logically inconsistent on its face. Just makes you look like an idiot.

Exactly, I bet she hasn't gotten laid in years, let alone the 7-8 times per day that her math would imply.

When her 15 minutes are up, Rush will still be sitting behind the golden mic, with a new crop of advertisiers and millions upon millions of listeners.

C'mon...that's your opinion masquerading as fact. According to your side, the fact that somebody like Maher can call somebody like Palin, who's a public person, a cunt (and believe me, I was more than ready to kick a few asses back in '08, over the whole treatment-of-Palin thing, so I'll be honest about that right up front) is somehow valid while somebody like Limbaugh, who's also making his money in much the same way as Maher -- though Limbaugh isn't paid by a network to do it -- can't make what he believes to be valid criticism of this Fluke woman, who is no less a public person through her "community activism" and less-than-truthful advocacy in front of the Congress? That was pure agitprop, and you clueless lefties swallow it hook, line and sinker with amazing consistency. I guess the need for civility in our discourse is only restricted to those on the Right, correct? Now who -- in defending Maher through pleas for logic, people, logic -- looks like an idiot, sirrah?

Not really a Maher fan, he comes off as too much of a dick, and is quite inconsistent at times. I prefer Stewart and Colbert for that style of 'infotainment'.

If you think calling someone a slut is a valid criticism of anyone, I'm hopeful that you'll find a remedial critical thinking course at your local community college.

Quote:

Bill Maher makes money by calling Sarah Palin a cunt.

There is actually a difference. It's kind of like Chris Rock using the n-word versus you calling a bunch of black people names that they find offensive for doing things that they normally do.

And FWIW, Bill Maher has been fired before for some of the stuff he has said.

and my point is that Righties are perfectly fine with suckling at the teat as long as the activity is within their definition of 'being responsible' - - if someone slams into the chalet while skiing down the bunny hill and breaks their leg - is that being responsible? Righties are happy with the teat as long as they get to draw the lines.

Quote:

Bill Maher makes money by calling Sarah Palin a cunt.

There is actually a difference. It's kind of like Chris Rock using the n-word versus you calling a bunch of black people names that they find offensive for doing things that they normally do.

And FWIW, Bill Maher has been fired before for some of the stuff he has said.

No, not at all. Maher called her a very offensive term (in any context) simply because he hates her, simply to be the pejorative it was. Limbaugh worked himself into a frenzy, following the logic he was arguing that she was asking others to pay for her sex. Ultimately having us pay her to have sex, hence his use of "whore". At least there was an over-the-edge rational way of getting there in Rush's case. Maher just hates.