If you’re asking why the issue wasn’t a national brouhaha before this point, I think it was because it was perceived as a state issue rather than a national one.
In my opinion, it is short-sighted to dismiss this as “just a political talking point for conservatives.” I am not a conservative. I am not a Republican. I am not opposed to birth control. I am a great admirer of the President.
This issue concerns me because the First Amendment concerns me. I understand that there are situations in which the state has a compelling interest to intrude upon freedom of conscience, but I think it is important to examine each situation carefully before making that determination.
And now today the Catholic Bishops reveal their true agenda. In discussions on proposed compromises–such as delaying implementation of the rule for a year–Anthony Picarello, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, was quote by USA Today (bolding mine):
So now it’s not universities/hospitals affiliated with the Catholic Church, it’s businesses owned by “good Catholics” who should be allowed to impose their morality on their employees.
Give these clowns an inch, they’ll take a mile. Robes and crucifixes aside, they are no different than any other right-wing PAC. Obama and the rest of the Democratic party should treat them as political enemies; this is a battle they can win by just standing pat.
I’m pretty sure we all see the difference between those two scenarios. I’m pretty sure we all also see that this is a hopelessly inaccurate analogy.
The primary purpose of a gift certificate for use at a brothel is renting a hooker. The primary purpose of health insurance is not obtaining birth control. In any event, this whole complaint completely ignores the fact that birth control is often prescribed for therapeutic purposes (ie., to correct chronic medical conditions).
The gift certificate isn’t for a brothel. It’s a Pre Paid Visa Card that can be used anywhere (including a brothel). No one is giving workers contraception. They are giving workers healthcare, which can be used for contraception, if the worker desires. Just like their wages can be used for an abortion, if the worker desires.
Never mind that this isn’t even for Churches. This is for businesses that Churches own. The Catholics are simply being children throwing a tantrum here.
I, for one, don’t dismiss that impulse at all. After looking into this issue, the societal benefits of wider availability of birth control, and the reasonable expectation that an employee should have it covered were compelling to me (as it has for many states, including quite conservative ones such as my home state of Arkansas, and the duly elected chief executive [of which I suspect I am less a fan than you are]).
Personally, I am more distressed by the church officials getting directly involved with the policy discussion. It’s not some uprising of everyday Catholic voters that is fueling this controversy, it’s very clearly the church hierarchy and their friends in the media. If the Catholic Church put this policy to a vote among their congregants, it would likely to win majority.
It’s not freedom. It’s asking for the right to impose their nonsense beliefs on others.
I understand that you are a Christian. Would you be okay if a Hindu employer managed to insure that you couldn’t spend your paycheck on leather? Or meat?
The organization decides that they want to offer healthcare. Healthcare in America includes reproductive services. It doesn’t demand that they use the services, it gives them the freedom to do choose.
Pregnancy used to have an approximately 1% mortality rate for the woman (higher for the neonate) - and in some places in the world still does. What changed that wasn’t advances in prayer technology, it was modern obstetrics and sanitation. A side effect of that is contraception technology, which is medically effective, meaning that it works for its intended purpose at a standard rate.
I find it absolutely puzzling that people think their morality should dictate what legitimate medical treatments their employees are able to access without having to pay extra money or visit a bunch of different doctors, things that are out of the ordinary for accessing health care. If people believe that contraception is wrong and evil, they don’t need my approval or permission to not use it. But these latest comments from the bishops really make it sound like they’re trying to enforce through difficulty of access what they can’t persuade their own congregations to do.
But that is not how conservatives are spinning this. The talking point, as articulated by John Boehner from the floor of Congress, is that it is unconstitutional. So why is it constitutional for the states to do force church institutions to buy insurance that covers birth control, but not the federal government?
Buying an insurance policy is not the same as buying birth control. What the employee does with the insurance is no different than what they do with their salary, which can also be used to buy birth control.
I think you are missing the point. The Constitutional objection is not to what the employee does with the employees’ insurance at all. The religious institution objects to being required to purchase insurance coverage which includes birth control.
Whatever an employee of a religious organization freely chooses to purchase (his or her portion of the employer-provided insurance premium) is beside the point.
Whatever an employee of a religious organization freely chooses to purchase on the free market is also beside the point.
