The Fluke Doctrine


Sandra Fluke, the champion of free birth control for women, has reached a new low in her quest to shame the American public into believing that when it comes to promiscuity and sex, employers with well-formed consciences are badly in need of government intervention.

In addition, Fluke has a serious problem with religious freedom if the expression of that freedom interferes with her heart’s desire—free birth control.

But who exactly is this woman?

Nobody knew who she was until February of 2012 when Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and her colleagues on the House Steering Committee held a special hearing concerning the religious exemption on contraceptive coverage contained in the then-newly introduced Obama mandate. The only person called to testify at this hearing was Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke. This was to be the first time we would hear her name, but it certainly was not to be the last.

Fluke became the instant darling of feminists and the liberal media. Her unapologetic attack on people of faith who object to the Obama birth control mandate made her immediately welcome. And even though she is a Protestant, she claimed to speak for Catholics as well, saying during her testimony that it was important that “Catholic students have access to contraceptive coverage under the preventive care package of the Affordable Care Act.” In her testimony she said, “I attend a Jesuit law school that does not provide contraception coverage in its student health plan. Just as we students have faced financial, emotional, and medical burdens as a result, employees at religiously affiliated hospitals and universities across the country have suffered similar burdens.”

Fluke made it clear that the government should require that birth control coverage be provided regardless of religious tenets or moral objections to the use of birth control.

From the first news report about her comments nobody bothered to inquire how it was that Fluke had become an instant authority on the alleged burdens females were facing because they could not have free birth control. The fix was in and the media was happy to accommodate.

Last fall Fluke appeared with President Obama for the first time during a campaign rally in Denver, assuring the audience that Obama was the man who understood what women need.

The Washington Post, in a report entitled “No Fluke: Obama Needs Colorado’s Women Voters” explained that Fluke is a necessary component for the emphasis Obama wished to place on his contraceptive mandate as being a positive action for women—one that separated him from his opponent.

To this day, Fluke continues to be the female face of Obama’s quest to make sure that taxpayers provide birth control to any woman who wants it and cannot pay for it. So it is no surprise that last Friday when the Obama administration released its revised rule Fluke was on hand delivering her kooky insights once again.

Appearing on MSNBC, Fluke spoke about employers who have religious objections to providing birth control coverage, telling the audience, “Now if you take a step back and think about that, that’s—you know, you work at a restaurant, you work at a store, and your boss is able to deny you leukemia coverage, or contraception coverage, or blood transfusions, or any number of medical concerns that someone might have a religious objection to. So the folks who are still objecting have some very extreme ideas about religious freedom and employee healthcare in this country.”

Extreme? Who exactly do you think is extreme? Is it an employer who does not want to violate his conscience by being forced to subsidize birth control coverage to his employees or a woman who compares free birth control with insurance coverage for a serious disease like leukemia?

In Fluke’s world there are no moral absolutes; there is no place for religious liberty or conscience protection if it interferes with access to free birth control.

Fluke is the perfect poster girl for our sexually saturated society’s insatiable appetite for perversion.

And that’s no fluke!


About Author

  • Hank

    Your assertions about Fluke’s testimony are blatantly wrong (you should try reading her actual testimony) and you have a poor understanding of Catholic Universities. Here is some history:

  • goral

    A Fluke flake chimes in, in support of pope Pelosi’s and Obama’s feminist poster child.
    “In Fluke’s world there are no moral absolutes” That statement applies to Obama’s world and Pelosi’s world and the world of all the Fluke flunkies who support this
    perversion being passed off as a freedom or a right.

  • Noel Fitzpatrick


    I do not know much about Ms Fluke.

    I know that “Rush Limbaugh labeled Sandra Fluke a “slut” and “prostitute”
    based on her speech before House Democrats. Fluke appeared to support
    mandating health insurers to cover contraceptive costs. Limbaugh stated:

    “[Fluke] essentially says that she must be paid to have sex—what does
    that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute.
    She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t
    afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay
    her to have sex” (

    Does anyone in CL believe Mr Limbaugh? He was trying to be ‘humorous’, perhaps Goral you are trying to be the same.

  • goral

    Not at all, Noel. I am being serious. I can’t speak for Rush but my guess is that he was serious as well. The paragraph that you quoted pretty much speaks for itself.

    Someone who is a student and at a Catholic university at that, then goes on a national campaign and on national TV to promote per-marital sex, promiscuity and the responsibility for which to be borne by those of us who are diametrically opposed to her is prostituting herself for an immortal cause.

    This is so plain to see, that in my estimation, those who question the articles assessment of Ms. Fluke are themselves suspect of a brand of catholicism that is to the left of Obama.and at the heart of the current crisis in our Church.