Sandra Fluke Argued for Mandatory Coverage for Sex-Change Surgery

Spread the love

Loading


Rather belatedly, we are becoming aware that this supposedly typical Georgetown coed is not very typical at all:

[B]irth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. 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.
The title of the article . . . is “Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons” and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review.

Remember, as Byron York previously reported, Fluke was rejected as a last-minute substitute witness at a Feb. 16 committee hearing because staffers for Chairman Issa were unable to discover Fluke’s claim to expertise relevant to the subject of the hearing. This law school journal article is the sort of thing that might have been discovered about Fluke’s background, had the Democrats who put Fluke forward as a witness done so with the usual 72-hour advance notice. Here’s one brief quote from the article:

Transgender persons wishing to undergo the gender reassignment process frequently face heterosexist employer health insurance policies that label the surgery as cosmetic or medically unnecessary and therefore uncovered.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Let’s put all the trash about Rush away. He made his point and also apologized for acting like a MSM wacho. Which is true. Fact remains is that this chick is an activist and Democrats put her in front of a subcommittee as an expert which she was clearly not. Then they wanted her to appear on the committee to discuss how unconstitutional 0-bama’s push for contraception was. Unrelated but nice try Democrats. They know they can’t stick to the issue because they will lose. So, as usual deceive and distort strategy is in play.

Up until Fluke hit the scene Dems were talking about access to birth control.
But they have slid the goalposts.
Now they want FREE birth control whether it is pills, condoms, sterilization, sex change (that’s pretty permanent) or abortions.
Now access is beside the point.
FREE is the new Dem talking point.

So she has some radical ideas. Does that make her wrong on this issue. If she was just an ordinary, run-of-the-mill student, she probably wouldn’t have been put in the position to get all the publicity—that’s how the world works. She was merely offered to a committee of all male religious leaders as a dissenting opinion on contraception as a women’s health issue, and not a religious matter. Talk about conservatives stacking the deck.

@Liberal1 (objectivity): What a wingnut you are. She chooses a Catholic School and then wants Birth Control. She is wrong on the issues and contraception is NOT the issue. The issue is 0-bama’s intrusion on the Constitution and the 1st amendment. Democrats want to change the argument because they will lose otherwise.