Welcome!

Thanks for stopping by! If you like what you read, tell your friends! If you don't like what you read, tell your enemies! Either way, please post a comment, even if it's just to tell us how much we suck! (We're really needy!) You can even follow us @JasonBerner! Or don't! See if we care!







Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Birth Control: Not Just for Rich Folks, Anymore

An advisory panel has recommended that insurance providers be required to cover contraception.  If adopted, this rule would allow women of all income levels reasonable access to basic contraceptive measures (e.g., birth-control pills, etc).  This measure would presumably reduce unwanted pregnancies and, consequently, abortions.  Sounds like a win-win for everyone.  It's always nice to see common-sense rearing its unfamiliar head in our hyperpartisan political culture.  Who could have a problem with this?

Oh, of course. . . .
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and some conservative groups, including the Family Research Council, denounced the recommendation on birth control.

“Pregnancy is not a disease, and fertility is not a pathological condition to be suppressed,” said Deirdre A. McQuade, a spokeswoman for the bishops’ Pro-Life Secretariat. “But the Institute of Medicine report treats them as such.”
We've spent many a fruitless hour trying to understand and/or sympathize with the knee-jerk hostility of religious zealots to anything that runs afoul of their beliefs (notwithstanding the fact that these folks have freely chosen to live in a country which, at least in principle, gives no consideration to religious beliefs when formulating legislation).  We think we've finally figured out what's bothering these people.  So, in the interest of promoting national harmony, we would like to send a message to the Deirdre A. McQuades of the nation:

Just because insurance companies COVER reproductive services like birth control, this doesn't mean that you and your co-religionists would be forced to TAKE birth-control pills or have abortions.

There!  That should take care of that!  You're welcome, America! 

Solipsistography
"Panel Recommends Coverage for Contraception"
Labels: ,

3 comments:

  1. AnonymousJuly 21, 2011 at 1:15 AM

    "Pregnancy is not a disease and fertility is not a pathological condition..."
    See: OCTOMOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousFebruary 4, 2012 at 12:07 AM

    Excellent piece on the merits and the topic. Agree with nearly all points in this analysis, save one: Our Constitution does not hold us to a standard of "giving no consideration to religious beliefs when formulating legislation." To the contrary, much consideration is now given (and has been from the nation's founding) to ALL beliefs (religious and areligious) in formulating legislation.

    What was specifically forbidden in the Constitution was for there to be an Establishment of a State religion for all citizens and residents; and in the First Amendment, Congress forbade itself from impinging on individual rights to religious expression. Most states have codified parallel versions of these two ideas (no State religion; individual right to practice or not as a matter of conscience) within their Constitutions and/or Bills of Rights (terminology of course varies by state).

    All that said, my impression is that you meant to say that debates concerning legislation on other topics (health, finance, etc.) should be freed from arguments based on religious convictions. That too is a matter of conscience on the part of the legislators and the electorate who "hire" them. Will you be accessing the Colbert SuperPAC for campaign assistance?...AWD

    ReplyDelete
  3. The SolipsistFebruary 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM

    I should get Colbert involved in this. . . . I have him on speed-dial.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)