This Matt Walsh guy

[SemiSweet]

 

Lol, it definitely has a strong 'rally the troops' component. :)

 

Some 'food for thought' I've read and discussed with others:

 

1. On the Hobby Lobby ruling- pointing out the widely misunderstood (or blatantly false) accusation that HL wouldn't pay for birth control. When in fact it pays for 16 of the 20 forms. The "Get out of my bedroom but leave your wallet" syndrome, he calls it. A liberal family member read the post and said they'd only heard that HL would pay for NONE, because that's what the mainsteam media was reporting.

 

"Whether any employer covers birth control or not, none are trying to stop women from accessing it. The issue here is whether a private company should be forced to pay for birth control, not whether it should be allowed to sneak into your house at night and check to make sure you don’t have a bottle of Yaz in your medicine cabinet. If your boss is in your bedroom, call the police. Or stop inviting him in. When you ask him to pay for what you do in the bedroom, you are inviting him in. Want him out? Good. Then stop making your birth control into a national headline. Deal with it yourself, privately." (http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/06/30/want-birth-control-go-buy/#W9YQR4QpuKOGSmbk.99)

 

2. On challenges that he, as a white man, has no right to express opinions on 'race issues' or 'women's issues':

 

 

False Premise #1: You need to be a member of an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢ in order to objectively evaluate a topic relating to an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢.

Alright, here’s the problem: If a personal and emotional tie to an issue makes you more likely to ascertain and identify the truth in it, then our court system needs to be drastically reworked. Most people would consider it a grave injustice if a man was on trial for murder and the prosecution stacked the jury box with the families of murder victims. Or if someone was charged with vehicle theft and his fate was to be decided by a jury of people who just had their car stolen last week.(http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/03/white-men-have-no-right-to-give-their-white-man-opinions-because-theyre-white-men/2/#ZmSqxXDSS1IpLbua.99)

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

"If we really wanted to punish the film and TV industry for employing disreputable characters, I’m not sure why we’d start with a couple of dudes who want to renovate old homes, instead of going after, say, Woody Allen. Woody Allen is a crusty old liberal, alleged child rapist, pervert who married his own adopted daughter. And he’s beloved in pop culture. Nobody boycotts his movies, or the production company, or the theaters that show his films.

 

Roman Polanski drugged and raped a child and then fled the country to avoid prosecution. He’s also a darling of movie critics and the Hollywood liberal elite.

Eddie Murphy likes to troll street corners for transvestite hookers, yet he still gets roles in children’s movies.

Several women have accused Bill Clinton of rape — not just affairs, rape — but he’s a hero to the left.

Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and Oliver Stone were BFFs with Hugo Chavez, a murderous socialist tyrant. But they never seem to get the Benham brothers or Brendan Eich treatment.

Mike Tyson was actually convicted of rape, but that certainly doesn’t mean he can’t get hilarious and quirky cameos in big budget Hollywood comedies.

The point is, you turn on the TV or crank up the Pandora and you’re going to be watching or listening to a stream of deviants, junkies, rapists, pedophiles, adulterers, and crooks, yet we don’t bat an eye until someone quotes the Bible or endorses traditional marriage."

(http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/08/christian-hating-liberal-fascists-demonstrated-tolerance/#XFqwMoTOyOLVewhP.99)

 

All food for thought. :001_smile:

#1 - is absolutely false, see Wheaton college.

#2 - I think everyone has a right to any opinion they want to have, they just tend to gain more credibility on that opinion if they actually have experience that pertains to that opinion. So yeah, his opinion on race issues as a white male just aren't that valid because he's never been pulled over for driving while black or whatever. Sorry, experience is what makes one opinion more valid than another.

#3 - Hollywood is an effed up place, period. I think having anti-gay people on that particular channel would probably not be good for business because gays are probably a good bit of their viewers. I boycott watching lots and lots of films based on who's in them. So where does he get the idea that nobody boycotts them? They still make money, sure, but there are people, even liberals like me boycotting people as well as businesses. I always try to speak with my dollars.

[poppy]

Heather K thank you for accepting the challenge!

#1, not going there again, it's the fastest way to a thread lock!

#2, I am white and have TONS of opinions about race!

#3, it's all about the Benjamins.  A show about design that is anti-gay is just moronic.  It'd be like a show about ways to cook bacon on a channel for vegetarians.

[Slartibartfast]

Lol, it definitely has a strong 'rally the troops' component. :)

 

Some 'food for thought' I've read and discussed with others:

 

1. On the Hobby Lobby ruling- pointing out the widely misunderstood (or blatantly false) accusation that HL wouldn't pay for birth control. When in fact it pays for 16 of the 20 forms. The "Get out of my bedroom but leave your wallet" syndrome, he calls it. A liberal family member read the post and said they'd only heard that HL would pay for NONE, because that's what the mainsteam media was reporting.

 

"Whether any employer covers birth control or not, none are trying to stop women from accessing it. The issue here is whether a private company should be forced to pay for birth control, not whether it should be allowed to sneak into your house at night and check to make sure you don’t have a bottle of Yaz in your medicine cabinet. If your boss is in your bedroom, call the police. Or stop inviting him in. When you ask him to pay for what you do in the bedroom, you are inviting him in. Want him out? Good. Then stop making your birth control into a national headline. Deal with it yourself, privately." (http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/06/30/want-birth-control-go-buy/#W9YQR4QpuKOGSmbk.99)

 

Someone else already addressed Wheaton College.

 

2. On challenges that he, as a white man, has no right to express opinions on 'race issues' or 'women's issues':

 

 

False Premise #1: You need to be a member of an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢ in order to objectively evaluate a topic relating to an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢.

Alright, here’s the problem: If a personal and emotional tie to an issue makes you more likely to ascertain and identify the truth in it, then our court system needs to be drastically reworked. Most people would consider it a grave injustice if a man was on trial for murder and the prosecution stacked the jury box with the families of murder victims. Or if someone was charged with vehicle theft and his fate was to be decided by a jury of people who just had their car stolen last week.

(http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/03/white-men-have-no-right-to-give-their-white-man-opinions-because-theyre-white-men/2/#ZmSqxXDSS1IpLbua.99)

 

I don't exactly understand his point.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/06/23/lyon.racial.jury.selection/

 

http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6584&context=jclc

 

Walsh whines about privilege pretty often. One thing he ought to consider is that he would be more likely to be placed on a jury in a trial involving a black man than an African American would. That is an example of privilege. I think that is a problem. He probably doesn't.

 

I don't think anyone ever said only minorities are allowed to give opinions about race but that is probably his hyperbole talking again.

 

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

"If we really wanted to punish the film and TV industry for employing disreputable characters, I’m not sure why we’d start with a couple of dudes who want to renovate old homes, instead of going after, say, Woody Allen. Woody Allen is a crusty old liberal, alleged child rapist, pervert who married his own adopted daughter. And he’s beloved in pop culture. Nobody boycotts his movies, or the production company, or the theaters that show his films.

 

Roman Polanski drugged and raped a child and then fled the country to avoid prosecution. He’s also a darling of movie critics and the Hollywood liberal elite.

Eddie Murphy likes to troll street corners for transvestite hookers, yet he still gets roles in children’s movies.

Several women have accused Bill Clinton of rape — not just affairs, rape — but he’s a hero to the left.

Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and Oliver Stone were BFFs with Hugo Chavez, a murderous socialist tyrant. But they never seem to get the Benham brothers or Brendan Eich treatment.

Mike Tyson was actually convicted of rape, but that certainly doesn’t mean he can’t get hilarious and quirky cameos in big budget Hollywood comedies.

The point is, you turn on the TV or crank up the Pandora and you’re going to be watching or listening to a stream of deviants, junkies, rapists, pedophiles, adulterers, and crooks, yet we don’t bat an eye until someone quotes the Bible or endorses traditional marriage."

(http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/08/christian-hating-liberal-fascists-demonstrated-tolerance/#XFqwMoTOyOLVewhP.99)

 

All food for thought. :001_smile:

 

I don't know what show HGTV canceled because I don't have cable and I don't tend to read tv drama news.

 

I agree Roman Polanski ought to have faced the music years ago, I don't watch his movies. I have NEVER seen a Woody Allen movie, my mom wouldn't allow them in her home because he married his adopted step daughter. As for child raping unless he has been tried by a jury of his peers then the proper term is "alleged." We don't know what happened, he wasn't charged. I am not super interested in seeing his movies but that is my decision.  

 

These actors you are listing are a bit further left than what most of Hollywood probably is IMO but I don't think Hollywood lacks for Conservative actors either.

 

Allen and Polanski have been strongly criticized in the media.

 

There is no evidence of Bill Clinton raping anyone. There was a recant of one accusation and another woman perjured herself. The only place where that would result in a guilty verdict is on freepers.

 

Mike Tyson is IMO, seriously insane. I also wonder why Michael Vick was allowed to make a comeback. 

[Joanne]

 

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

"If we really wanted to punish the film and TV industry for employing disreputable characters, I’m not sure why we’d start with a couple of dudes who want to renovate old homes, instead of going after, say, Woody Allen. Woody Allen is a crusty old liberal, alleged child rapist, pervert who married his own adopted daughter. And he’s beloved in pop culture. Nobody boycotts his movies, or the production company, or the theaters that show his films.

Roman Polanski drugged and raped a child and then fled the country to avoid prosecution. He’s also a darling of movie critics and the Hollywood liberal elite.

Eddie Murphy likes to troll street corners for transvestite hookers, yet he still gets roles in children’s movies.

Several women have accused Bill Clinton of rape — not just affairs, rape — but he’s a hero to the left.

Sean Penn, Michael Moore, and Oliver Stone were BFFs with Hugo Chavez, a murderous socialist tyrant. But they never seem to get the Benham brothers or Brendan Eich treatment.

Mike Tyson was actually convicted of rape, but that certainly doesn’t mean he can’t get hilarious and quirky cameos in big budget Hollywood comedies.

The point is, you turn on the TV or crank up the Pandora and you’re going to be watching or listening to a stream of deviants, junkies, rapists, pedophiles, adulterers, and crooks, yet we don’t bat an eye until someone quotes the Bible or endorses traditional marriage."

(http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/08/christian-hating-liberal-fascists-demonstrated-tolerance/#XFqwMoTOyOLVewhP.99)

 

All food for thought. :001_smile:

 

 

These are not necessarily comparable. One is a network, and others in your list are expectations of individuals.

 

For one, I am not a Woody Allen, Polanski, Clinton, Moore, Penn, Tyson fan.

 

However, if Murphy is trolling with adults, I am not sure that the "children's movies" concern is?

 

[Mrs Mungo]

1. On the Hobby Lobby ruling- pointing out the widely misunderstood (or blatantly false) accusation that HL wouldn't pay for birth control. When in fact it pays for 16 of the 20 forms. The "Get out of my bedroom but leave your wallet" syndrome, he calls it. A liberal family member read the post and said they'd only heard that HL would pay for NONE, because that's what the mainsteam media was reporting.

This is exactly the sort of strawman argument that I was talking about. I didn't see a single mainstream media report claiming that HL's specific case in the court was about them not paying for any birth control. That isn't the issue people had with it. The issue people had with it was that it could be expanded to any company with the most tenuous reasons for their belief system and to any form of birth control. The ruling was expanded to prove those fears correct *the very next day*. His strawman LIES misled his readers about the concerns of others, concerns which were absolutely proven to be reasonable because they did, indeed come to fruitiion.

 

 

2. On challenges that he, as a white man, has no right to express opinions on 'race issues' or 'women's issues':

 

 

False Premise #1: You need to be a member of an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢ in order to objectively evaluate a topic relating to an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢.

This is another strawman, false premise of an argument. Plenty of white male professors, laywers, judges, UCLA workers, politicans and others make objective decisions on such topics every day. The problem is that his article on "privilege" shows that he doesn't have the first inkling of what it means. His premises are routinely and demonstrably *false*.

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

"If we really wanted to punish the film and TV industry for employing disreputable characters, I’m not sure why we’d start with a couple of dudes who want to renovate old homes, instead of going after, say, Woody Allen. Woody Allen is a crusty old liberal, alleged child rapist, pervert who married his own adopted daughter. And he’s beloved in pop culture. Nobody boycotts his movies, or the production company, or the theaters that show his films.

This is another set of outright lies. I am a politically moderate Democrat. I don't see Woody Allen movies or Roman Polanski movies. There are *regularly* sets of articles about Woody Allen's behavior. He has been chastised in the media. We have discussed it here on multiple occasions. The TV industry (which is pretty separate from the movie industry, especially when it comes to channels like HGTV) is all about the money. If you are going to cost them money, it is all too easy to replace you. There are thousands of home remodelers out there to choose from.

 

Thanks for providing examples, they are exactly what I was talking about. If you want a discussion, he certainly isn't providing you with a good starting point when he lies to you about the premise of the other side's argument.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I just don't read when people share his posts.  I read a few and that was enough for me.  Forever.  I don't give him a second thought these days.

[Heather K.]

 

#1, not going there again, it's the fastest way to a thread lock!

 

Ha ha ha! Probably very true! :001_smile:

[Greta]

Heather, thank you for posting some specific examples.  I really do appreciate you taking the time to do that.  But if this is typical of how he writes, well just put me down as unimpressed.

 

 

1. On the Hobby Lobby ruling- pointing out the widely misunderstood (or blatantly false) accusation that HL wouldn't pay for birth control. When in fact it pays for 16 of the 20 forms. 

 

Wrong.  I understood that, and everyone I know understands that.  That's not the problem at all.  The problem is that the court made a ruling that basically says that the compensation that the employee has EARNED still gets to be controlled by the employer.  An employer-provided healthcare package is part of what one earns as an employee, just like the salary, the paid vacation days, etc.  Your employer should have no more control over how you use your health care than they should have over what you do with your vacation time, or how you spend your wages.  And I say that as a pro-life Christian.  This ruling was not about birth control.  It was about employees' rights.  And we all lost.

 

2. On challenges that he, as a white man, has no right to express opinions on 'race issues' or 'women's issues':

 

 

This was already addressed upthread:  criticism is not censorship.  Yes, Walsh has a right to his opinions, but that doesn't mean his opinions are above criticism or are automatically going to be valued and respected by everyone.  

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

 

"If we really wanted to punish the film and TV industry for employing disreputable characters, 

 

 

No one is "punishing" the film and tv industry.  Some tv execs made a decision based on what they thought would or would not get them good ratings.  Take it up with them, and don't blame the entire liberal population.  As far as his assessment of who liberals consider "beloved" I can only wonder if he's ever talked to an actual liberal.  Correction, I wonder if he's ever listened to an actual liberal.

 

All food for thought. 

 

Junk food.  The intellectual equivalent of Doritos and Twinkies. 

[LizzyBee]

Heather, thank you for posting some specific examples.  I really do appreciate you taking the time to do that.  But if this is typical of how he writes, well just put me down as unimpressed.

 

 

Wrong.  I understood that, and everyone I know understands that.  That's not the problem at all.  The problem is that the court made a ruling that basically says that the compensation that the employee has EARNED still gets to be controlled by the employer.  An employer-provided healthcare package is part of what one earns as an employee, just like the salary, the paid vacation days, etc.  Your employer should have no more control over how you use your health care than they should have over what you do with your vacation time, or how you spend your wages.  And I say that as a pro-life Christian.  This ruling was not about birth control.  It was about employees' rights.  And we all lost.

 

 

I saw tons of posts on FB by people who thought that HL doesn't provide any birth control in its health care plan.  IME, it was a common misconception.

 

The argument that employers should have no say about your health care is in itself a straw man argument. Employers do make decisions about what will and won't be included in order to control costs.  That's why every employer's health care plan is different, and people with health issues have to study a potential employer's health care plan before deciding whether to take the job.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I saw tons of posts on FB by people who thought that HL doesn't provide any birth control in its health care plan.  IME, it was a common misconception.

 

The argument that employers should have no say about your health care is in itself a straw man argument. Employers do make decisions about what will and won't be included in order to control costs.  That's why every employer's health care plan is different, and people with health issues have to study a potential employer's health care plan before deciding whether to take the job.

 

And part of the point of the ACA was too eliminate some of that disparity in health coverage as not everyone is aware of every health issue they may eventually have when job hunting.

[LizzyBee]

And part of the point of the ACA was too eliminate some of that disparity in health coverage as not everyone is aware of every health issue they may eventually have when job hunting.

 

I know. But it bothers me that birth control is such a big deal when people have to fight to get their insulin or cancer meds paid for.  I'm seeing this now with my friend who is going through chemo. They even denied her anti-nausea medicine.

 

I'm going to stop posting now so I don't derail the thread.

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I know. But it bothers me that birth control is such a big deal when people have to fight to get their insulin or cancer meds paid for.  I'm seeing this now with my friend who is going through chemo. They even denied her anti-nausea medicine.

 

I'm going to stop posting now so I don't derail the thread.

 

 

Isn't the solution to try and improve coverage for all rather than applauding efforts to reduce it?

[Mrs Mungo]

I know. But it bothers me that birth control is such a big deal when people have to fight to get their insulin or cancer meds paid for. I'm seeing this now with my friend who is going through chemo. They even denied her anti-nausea medicine.

 

 

My sister had insurance designed for a young healthy person-they would pay for a health club membership, but not an MRI. But, then she was diagnosed with breast cancer. There were a lot of things they wouldn't pay for. It was terrible. And she worked for the state!

 

The reason that they started with a small number of requirements is that they are considered preventative and many insurance providers didn't cover preventative drugs/treatments. Most insurance companies/plans cover things like insulin and chemo medications. Many of us are in favor of adding more requirements.

[Audrey]

Who is he and why would I care what he says?  Is he the missing child guy?

 

 

You're thinking of John Walsh, host of America's Most Wanted, and father of Adam Walsh. He is not a complete jackass like the Walsh in the thread title.

[Audrey]

 

 

All food for thought. 

 

Junk food.  The intellectual equivalent of Doritos and Twinkies. 

 

 

Just so you know... I'm totally stealing the bolded and using it whenever I possibly can. 

 

 

:D

[Greta]

I saw tons of posts on FB by people who thought that HL doesn't provide any birth control in its health care plan.  IME, it was a common misconception.

 

The argument that employers should have no say about your health care is in itself a straw man argument. Employers do make decisions about what will and won't be included in order to control costs.  That's why every employer's health care plan is different, and people with health issues have to study a potential employer's health care plan before deciding whether to take the job.

 

Well, I am genuinely surprised, because I simply never talked to anyone (face to face or on FB) that had that misconception.

 

I will concede that I was guilty of exaggeration, and making it sound more black and white than it actually is.  But I do not believe that what I said was a straw man.  HL was demanding a whole new level of specificity of control over their employees' healthcare coverage, and that was a step in the wrong direction, a blow to employee rights.

 

I wish that employers were taken out of the equation completely, and that we had a single-payer system. 

 

 

I know. But it bothers me that birth control is such a big deal when people have to fight to get their insulin or cancer meds paid for.  I'm seeing this now with my friend who is going through chemo. They even denied her anti-nausea medicine.

 

 

I agree with you profoundly and whole-heartedly on this point!  Coverage should be prioritized with life-saving treatments at the top of the list, and "convenience" type treatments at the bottom*.  Of course, I realize that a lot of gray-area exists with regard to what would be considered quality-of-life issues, and what would be considered mere convenience, but I still think we could do a lot better than what we're doing right now.  For example, my insurance plan (assuming I've reached my deductible) would pay for the same percentage of my total cost for life-saving emergency surgery after a traumatic injury as it would for certain medically unproven "alternative" treatments.  And that infuriates me, that they are wasting money on "treatments" that have zero evidence to back them up, when they could be putting that money toward things that have been demonstrated to actually work.

 

 

 

* I am not necessarily saying that contraception is merely a "convenience" issue, I think there's some complexities there that I don't want to get into.  But generally speaking, yeah, I would place it lower on the priority list than insulin and cancer drugs!!!

[Greta]

Just so you know... I'm totally stealing the bolded and using it whenever I possibly can. 

 

 

:D

 

:lol:  It is yours to use as you see fit.

[Scrub Jay]

Well, I am genuinely surprised, because I simply never talked to anyone (face to face or on FB) that had that misconception.

 

 

You're not alone, same here. 

[Leav97]

 

 

 

 

I agree with you profoundly and whole-heartedly on this point!  Coverage should be prioritized with life-saving treatments at the top of the list, and "convenience" type treatments at the bottom*.  Of course, I realize that a lot of gray-area exists with regard to what would be considered quality-of-life issues, and what would be considered mere convenience, but I still think we could do a lot better than what we're doing right now.  For example, my insurance plan (assuming I've reached my deductible) would pay for the same percentage of my total cost for life-saving emergency surgery after a traumatic injury as it would for certain medically unproven "alternative" treatments.  And that infuriates me, that they are wasting money on "treatments" that have zero evidence to back them up, when they could be putting that money toward things that have been demonstrated to actually work.

 

 

 

* I am not necessarily saying that contraception is merely a "convenience" issue, I think there's some complexities there that I don't want to get into.  But generally speaking, yeah, I would place it lower on the priority list than insulin and cancer drugs!!!

 

Contraception lowers the overall cost of healthcare buy preventing unwanted pregnancy.  Paying for a pregnancy, birth, well childcare, etc, is considerable more expensive than paying for birth control

[Greta]

Contraception lowers the overall cost of healthcare buy preventing unwanted pregnancy. Paying for a pregnancy, birth, well childcare, etc, is considerable more expensive than paying for birth control

True, financially it makes a lot more sense for the insurance company to cover it. But at the same time, I understand the frustration of seeing them refuse to cover medically necessary treatments for diseases while covering contraception. It's a mess.

[Leav97]

1. On the Hobby Lobby ruling- pointing out the widely misunderstood (or blatantly false) accusation that HL wouldn't pay for birth control. When in fact it pays for 16 of the 20 forms. The "Get out of my bedroom but leave your wallet" syndrome, he calls it. A liberal family member read the post and said they'd only heard that HL would pay for NONE, because that's what the mainsteam media was reporting.

 

He is setting up a straw man argument.  The question before the supreme court was 1) can a for profit company have religious beliefs and 2) can those beliefs exempt them from federal laws.

 

And the HL ruling has already been applied to other companies exempting them from providing any contraception.

 

 

2. On challenges that he, as a white man, has no right to express opinions on 'race issues' or 'women's issues':

False Premise #1: You need to be a member of an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢ in order to objectively evaluate a topic relating to an Approved Victim Groupâ„¢.

 

He is welcome to his opinion and no one is preventing him from speaking.  If you have a choice between listening to the perspective of a black man on the issue of driving while black, a researcher on the national affects of racism in criminal justice, or a white blogger, who cares more weight?  It's a question of evaluating sources.  Might there be times when the perspective of the white blogger is important? Sure, they could have experiences or solutions to offer.  But, listening to the people involved would be a better source of information.

 

 

3. On HGTV cancelling an upcoming show because the hosts (brothers) had openly supported traditional marriage:

Personally I think this was 50% a publicity stunt and 50% a business decision.  But, Hollywood and the TV industry have never been considered a great source of morals.

[Slartibartfast]

True, financially it makes a lot more sense for the insurance company to cover it. But at the same time, I understand the frustration of seeing them refuse to cover medically necessary treatments for diseases while covering contraception. It's a mess.

Contraception is used as a treatment for many conditions. It isn't just used for preventing pregnancy, that is only one of my many complaints about that issue.

 

My sister had breastcancer and her insurance wouldn't pay for genetic testing. It is ridiculous.

 

I think we just need national healthcare.

[Leav97]

Contraception is used as a treatment for many conditions. It isn't just used for preventing pregnancy, that is only one of my many complaints about that issue.

 

My sister had breastcancer and her insurance wouldn't pay for genetic testing. It is ridiculous.

 

I think we just need national healthcare.

 

I don't disagree.  I think we need a single payer system.

[Greta]

Contraception is used as a treatment for many conditions. It isn't just used for preventing pregnancy, that is only one of my many complaints about that issue.

Oh, believe me, I have first-hand knowledge of this. One of the forms of contraception that HL doesn't want to cover is one that I used - NOT for contraception, but for a medical condition. It was safer and less invasive than other medications and surgery available to me, which is why it was the first thing my doctor wanted to try.

 

I didn't mean to sound dismissive or unaware of these things, I was just trying not to get too far afield of the main topic. I'm sorry if my avoidance of the issue came across in a way I didn't intend.

 

My sister had breastcancer and her insurance wouldn't pay for genetic testing. It is ridiculous.

Completely ridiculous!

[zoobie]

I do know people who are woefully uninformed on the law, and when they get their "information" from places like this guy's blog or "news" stations, they remain woefully uninformed.

 

Why is HGTV responsible for the immoral ills of Hollywood? That's ludicrous. I watch it fairly frequently, and I've never seen Roman Polanski picking paint colors. Also, rapists = bigots say what? Every large business has immoral people and people who break the law working within it. That whole "argument" is inane. If you're a public face of a business, and you publicly announce an opinion that harms the business, expect to get fired. If one of the show hosts went on interviews declaring all Christians to be disgusting and immoral and got canned, would Mr. Walsh be standing up for his freedom of speech? Heck no! It's not freedom of speech or religion guys like him are promoting. It's their region being dominant and their speech free from repercussion.

[Slartibartfast]

I did read about the controversy with the two siblings and HGTV.

 

I think they lose their audience with the claims that demon ideologies are in our universities and schools, and that evolution is "Satan's toehold." One of them compared fighting gay marriage to combating Nazis. He blamed the Aurora Colorado shooting on Democrats, he stalked an abortion Dr and handed out "wanted" posters with the Dr's face on them, his organization is profiled on the ADL website http://www.adl.org/combating-hate/domestic-extremism-terrorism/c/backgrounder-operation-save-america.html

 

On the OSA website he condemned the Sandy Hook interfaith memorial ceremony as an "affront to God" and then quoted ""My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children." Hosea 4:6." I just don't know what to say to that.

 

I don't want to quote their website or link it as I don't want it to come up in a search.

 

I am shocked that show was ever greenlighted! If I was in charge of HGTV I would gotten rid of them as well. This is not people that anyone should want to get behind IMO. They didn't get fired for being anti-gay, it sounds more like they were fired for being raging nutjobs.

 

IMO it is lying to say they were fired for being anti-gay, Matt Walsh should have researched that better or have been more clear about the real issue. IMO it is a manipulation of conservatives because they might agree on the homosexuality issue, I don't think most of them would agree with a lot of the crazy stuff this family has done.

 

I find it very unfortunate these people are getting extra attention for whining about how the mean gays are picking on them. That is horrible.

[Slartibartfast]

Oh, believe me, I have first-hand knowledge of this. One of the forms of contraception that HL doesn't want to cover is one that I used - NOT for contraception, but for a medical condition. It was safer and less invasive than other medications and surgery available to me, which is why it was the first thing my doctor wanted to try.

 

I didn't mean to sound dismissive or unaware of these things, I was just trying not to get too far afield of the main topic. I'm sorry if my avoidance of the issue came across in a way I didn't intend.

I see, sorry I was just saying that because the only times I have used oral contraception or the patch was because my hormones were going insane, I have never used it to prevent pregnancy. If I get very stressed I have multiple periods in a month, I already have a bleeding disorder and so that makes me really crazy.

[Greta]

I see, sorry I was just saying that because the only times I have used oral contraception or the patch was because my hormones were going insane, I have never used it to prevent pregnancy. If I get very stressed I have multiple periods in a month, I already have a bleeding disorder and so that makes me really crazy.

Totally my fault for not being clear. You have my sympathy regarding the health issues. :grouphug:

[Haiku]

He's the it-boy of the minute, and soon enough he'll fade away.

[Scrub Jay]

He's the it-boy of the minute, and soon enough he'll fade away.

 

My husband claimed something similar about Sarah Palin but we are still stuck with her.Granted, she's just a reality show star pretty much these days but still..

 

[Haiku]

My husband claimed something similar about Sarah Palin but we are still stuck with her.Granted, she's just a reality show star pretty much these days but still..

 

I didn't even know she was still around.

[zoobie]

I didn't even know she was still around.

She's starting her own subscription web broadcast channel. You get to see her and her daughter's thoughts on world events and sneak peaks into the Palin household! For only $9.95/month or $99.95 a year!

 

Stephen Colbert purchased TheSarahPalinChannel.com and is promoting it as the only Sarah Palin channel on the web with a definite article. :smilielol5:

[KungFuPanda]

Um . . . I forgot I even started this thread. I had to catch up on three pages!

 

 

But he's been married for, like, 5 whole years! And has TWO young children! Clearly, this man knows what he's talking about. Someone get this man a book deal! (Oh wait... I think they already did.)

 

  

 

That explains WHY he sounds like an arrogant 20-something. We've all met that guy who's in his first grown-up job and just has it all figured out. How do you give parenting or marriage advice with so little time-in-service? Now if you've been married for 50 years, I'm definitely interested in your expertise. With all those conservative values he should remember that children should be seen and not heard.

 

Well, his opinions are usually trashing someone or something.  Women who like smutty books, affirmative action, women in the military, gay marriage.  Even when he's writing about something he likes, it's to smear people who disagree with him.  

 

If I wrote that I loved 50 Shades of Gray, affirmative action, women in the military and gay marriage, would you think I was being judgmental?

 

If I wrote that people who don't like affirmative action are racist, people who don't want women in combat are sexist, and people who don't support gay marriage are bigots, would you think I was being judgmental?

 

He's just a slam artist.  It's an art.  But it's not just "an opinion".

 

Which I wouldn't care about if so many of my friends didn't like the guy!

Did he badmouth women in the military? Ugh. Say it ain't so!

[Mrs Mungo]

Did he badmouth women in the military? Ugh. Say it ain't so!

Yes. You see, women should act like WOMEN. Women NEED men. Mind you, he's never actually served in the military and VERY OBVIOUSLY from his posts has zero knowledge about the military or military culture.

[KungFuPanda]

Yes. You see, women should act like WOMEN. Women NEED men. Mind you, he's never actually served in the military and VERY OBVIOUSLY from his posts has zero knowledge about the military or military culture.

He should try being a woman in the military. Nothing in the world feels more womanly than being a woman in the military! Does he think there's ONE MOS entitled Carry Heavy Things? My sister supports her 4 kids and SAH husband as a military nurse. Her husband is the main caregiver and occasional part-time job holder (deployments permitting). They've been married 4 times longer than MW.

[Mrs Mungo]

He should try being a woman in the military. Nothing in the world feels more womanly than being a woman in the military! Does he think there's ONE MOS entitled Carry Heavy Things? My sister supports her 4 kids and SAH husband as a military nurse. Her husband is the main caregiver and occasional part-time job holder (deployments permitting). They've been married 4 times longer than MW.

One of my really good friends works at home in internet security because his wife is a wing commander. Tell her she doesn't belong in the Air Force, she would MESS YOU UP! Seriously, I firmly believe she could kick MW's butt and is more likely to be able to carry someone else than him. He doesn't look like he lifts anything heavier than his laptop.