So, now Democrats have declared that it is so vitally important that women be sexually satisfied that the taxpayer must be further robbed, and the Vatican robbed as well, to guarantee that they will be relieved of all responsibility and shielded from all consequences of pursuing recreational sex.
(As an aside, I am deeply disappointed in Rush for apologizing for stating a readily obvious fact. Especially considering that she is not a real law student, but enrolled, taking up a space that could have been used by a sincere student, for the express purpose of her childish activism.)
We wouldn’t want to be sexist, so if taxpayers and the Vatican must pay for female law students to have sex without consequences, of course they must provide the same for male students. I have read that in recent years ladies of the evening have had to lower their prices, thanks to the financial crisis, but providing carefree recreational sex to young men will still be considerably more expensive than providing it to women; Vox Day did the math and calculated that with birth control expenses like the ones she claims, the girl must be having sex three to four times a day, every single day of the year. (And to think she was called a slut!) Still, we mustn’t be unfair. If it will make everyone feel better, I volunteer to publicly call the young men bounders or sex addicts or whatever epithet is considered uncomplimentary enough.
As a bonus, after a couple of months law students will be so exhausted that we can look forward to a future without lawyers.