Outraged??? The taxpayers who would foot the bill for her excessive sex drive (her own admission) are the ones who should be outraged.
The worthless slut can screw all she wants and buy all of the birth control she wants on her time and her dime. The rest of us have no obligation to support her sex/prostitution habits.
Aside from that, if birth control pills at worst, cost her $30 a month then her cost of BC would be $360 which is far from $3000. So, if she is spending the other $2640 on condoms then assuming an average cost of $10 for a box of 12 premium condoms then she’s buying 264 boxes of 12 which spread (pardon the reference) over 12 months then that is approximately 264 condoms a month or 8.8 condoms per day.
Wow! That really is a lot of sex, more than most prostitutes would put up with for a single day much less every day.
Now that her name and institution is out there, how long before her address is out there and the phone calls and long lines of men start forming to help her use all of those condoms?
She is a self-described slut who is pandering to the taxpayer to “pay” for her habits; thus fitting the label of prostitute.
I think it is time for the press to take this to the next level and interview her parents so they can express solidarity with her and tell us all how happy they are that she is getting laid so much.
Yes! If her cost figures are accurate either she is using solid gold condoms for her boyfriends or she is... well, being a SLUT!
What is your source for these statements? At Post 88 there is a link to a transcript of her prepared statement. If you read it carefully, NO WHERE does she say that she PERSONALLY uses birth control or has sex. If I missed something in my three readings, please point it out to me.
Was there subsequent testimony not included in her prepared statement where she self-describes herself as a "slut" or states she has an excessive sex drive? If so, I'd appreciate a link, so I can read up on it.
Now I don't think much of her logic skills ... she chose to attend a Jesuit University and the Catholic Church's teaching is not merely against birth control, it is against extra-marital sex. She wants to claim victim status because " ... we refuse to pick between a quality education and our health." So there is no other quality law school besides Georgetown? And Georgetown doesn't endanger your health - you endanger your health by having extra-marital sex. Georgetown simply refuses to be an enabler for this destructive behavior.
The only part of her testimony that has any resonance with me is regarding women who need to be treated with contraceptives for ovarian disease. The Catholic Church has made clear that such a use of these drugs is permissable within the Church's teachings, and insurance companies should be paying for medications to actually treat a disease.
But pregnancy is NOT a disease ...