The recent controversy over funding of contraception has made me question whether I am liberal or conservative. I have always thought of myself as a liberal, though conservative on some issues. I have always believed that a person’s sexual behavior is his or her own business as long as it does not harm anyone else. The contraception controversy causes me to think that maybe I am more conservative than liberal. I believe that government should stay out of private business as much as possible. The government should get involved in private business only to the extent of protecting citizens who are incapable of protecting themselves.
The controversy over the funding of contraception is more evidence of a widespread sense of entitlement. Women may have the right to access to birth control, but that does not compel anyone to provide it for them. Not paying for something is not the same as denying someone’s rights. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees our right to say what we want, but that does not mean that the government or our employers are compelled to buy air time on radio or television so that we can say it.
Not only that, but health insurance provided by employers is a benefit, an incentive. Employers offer it because if they didn’t, they would be less competitive at attracting the employees that they need to run a business. If our government mandates what kind of coverage they have to provide, it seems to me that that employers will have more incentive to not provide health insurance. It is already getting to be expensive and complicated. If a religious organization or a private businessperson objects to paying for a morning-after pill on religious grounds, that is their business. They just need to make that clear during the recruiting process, so that anyone considering a job with them can make an informed decision.
If contraception should be between a woman and her doctor, then it should be between a woman and her doctor. It should be her responsibility. If a woman thinks that her employer should pay for her contraception, then it is up to her to negotiate that with her employer. If the employer refuses, the employer has not denied the woman her right to access to birth control. It just means that she needs to consider whether she wants to stay with that employer or find one who will hire her on terms that are more acceptable to her.
While I don't believe in abortion as a form of birth control, I do believe there are cases when it's necessary. As far as birth control being covered under insurance policies? Why shouldn't it be? Viagra is. There are many more reasons that women are prescribed birth control other than family planning and should be included in insurance plans. What if the employers religion beliefs are such that they don't agree with surguries, should that be denied to an employee? By allowing employers to make determinations on what kind of health coverage will be offered according to their personal beliefs is opening a can of worms. It's bad enough that insurance companies think they're physicians, we don't need employers forcing their religious or moral beliefs on everyone that works for them. Your last statement might be plausible if there was an abundance of jobs. As it stands, most people need to take whatever job they can. If they're denied birth control coverage, whether for medical reasons or family planning, and can't afford it on her own. What happens then?
ReplyDelete