Abortion long has been a battlefront in the country’s culture wars. Opponents of abortion have cudgeled the thinking of the Supreme Court in extending the right to privacy. Virtually unmentioned in all the discussion, heated and otherwise, has been the ruling that set the foundation for the abortion decision, the 1965 high court opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, holding, essentially, that the use of birth control was a private decision, or right, for women.
Thus it has been both astonishing and disturbing to see birth control at the center of the presidential campaign. Differences that could have been bridged reasonably — and were in a proposal from the Obama White House — have escalated into a sharp partisan battle.
Republicans have seized the moment to advance their portrayal of the president’s health care plan as a vast overreach by the government, a trampling of religious liberties no less. They seem to have little regard for the tone and impact regarding the liberties of women. The matter reached a point recently in which the U.S. Senate narrowly defeated a Republican proposal to let employers and health insurance companies deny coverage for contraceptives and other items they find objectionable on religious or moral grounds.
All of this stems from a worthy provision of the new health care law that requires insurers to cover certain preventive services without co-payments or deductibles.
An accommodation shouldn’t be so hard — unless partisans are convinced of an advantage in fanning and prolonging the argument.
Akron (Ohio) Beacon Journal (March 6)
The organizations aren’t prohibiting women from getting the birth control or discriminating against them because they chose to use them; they don’t want to pay for it on moral grounds. First Amendment – freedom of religion. Let me ask you this: should employers be required to pay for their employees firearms? Right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
The pro abortion president and the Dems are loosing the abortion debate so THEY decided to bring up the issue of birth control. No one was even discussing the issue. The pro abortion president and the Dems decided to twist issues to take attention off of their failed policies. When you looked beyond the headlines you can find the truth.
really? the democratic party simply handed the microphone to religious conservatives. they chose to hang themselves with it.
What religious conservatives are you talking about?
By tailoring health insurance packages to suit their own personal religious preferences employers are imposing their religion on employees. While that may be acceptable when the church itself is the employer it is entirely objectionable in any other situation. Our Constitution guarantees us freedom of religion, not freedom to impose religion.
Anyone who does not like their employer provided health insurance plan is free to purchase insurance elsewhere or to be employed elsewhere. Nothing is being imposed on the employee.
That would be the Dickensian view of the employer-employee relationship. Employers may not discriminate on the basis of religion in hiring and so it follows they also should not be allowed to impose their religious bias in determining compensation, including insurance. Compensation is earned by the employee, not “donated” by the employer.
Compensation earned by the employEE is set by the employER, not the employEE. By accepting a job the employEE is accepting the compensation as offered.
As long as all employees are offered the same compensation then there is no discrimination.
an employer has a choice to provide insurance or even employ people at all. nothing is being imposed on the employer. if one is really that morally opposed to providing the pill, don’t employ people.
Good example of progressive “logic”.
“Virtually unmentioned in all the discussion, heated and otherwise, has been the ruling that set the foundation for the abortion decision, the 1965 high court opinion in Griswold v. Connecticut, holding, essentially, that the use of birth control was a private decision, or right, for women.”
*********************************************
Private decision, private money.