by Christian M. Stempert
I had the opportunity on Monday morning to listen in on a press conference held by the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. While their support for Obamacare in general, and the HHS Contraceptive Mandate in particular was expected, I was surprised by some of the statements that were made. Some were misguided, some misunderstood the truth, and others were simply false. Three of these arguments in particular struck me, because they have a common theme. This commonality is very telling, I think, because it sheds light not only on the assumptions behind the HHS Mandate, but liberal thought in general.
The first argument was made by Rev. Harry Knox, the recently-appointed President of RCRC. He made the case that when conservatives oppose the HHS Mandate on the grounds of religious liberty, they are actually taking away freedom of conscience and the right to practice religious beliefs from individuals, and placing over it a broad policy put in place by a religious institution.
The second was made by the President of Catholics for Choice, Jon O’Brien. According to him, revoking the HHS Mandate “allows executives’ religious beliefs to trump individuals’ beliefs and consciences.” Advocates who oppose the Mandate “will not rest until every single worker must ask their employer to use…sometimes life-saving contraception.”
The third one comes from Rabbi Jessica Oleon of the Central Conference of American Rabbis, who said that “anything less than [full access to contraception at no cost to the user] is a violation of religious liberty, privacy, and conscience.”
The HHS Mandate is based on the assumption that everyone has a fundamental right to use contraceptives. And not just to use them, to but obtain them without having to pay for them. This is due to another assumption: that contraception is included in the “basic human right to healthcare.” This, however, is a false claim.
While individuals do have the right to decide if and when they want to have children, as liberals like to point out, that right also comes with the obligation to act responsibly and ensure that if no children are desired, no children are conceived. The HHS Mandate would essentially remove the obligation of sexual responsibility from the individuals, and force others to finance what is basically their lack of self-control.
People do have the right to decide when they want children, but they do not have the right to force others to finance their efforts to make that happen.
In the statement that opened the press conference, Knox asserted that it would violate the consciences and religious beliefs of many individuals if they brought a child into the world before they were ready. This is essentially the same argument that Rabbi Oleon made later on.
This may be true, but the idea that the HHS Mandate is the only way to keep people from having children before they’re ready is utterly fallacious.
Today in America, anyone can walk down to the local drug store and purchase effective contraceptives for just a few dollars. Or, if they want them for free, clinics and pregnancy counseling centers all over the country give them away at no charge. They won’t necessarily be the newest and most high-tech, but they will be effective. That’s the important part, right? And nowhere in this debate do we hear any mention of the most effective method of preventing pregnancy: abstinence.
This is just the logical outpouring of the Roe v. Wade. Regardless of what you think about the practice of abortion, the decision allowed for individuals to escape the consequences of their sexual activity. That’s exactly what’s going on here, and the HHS Mandate would force others – be it employers or the top 40% of American earners (the non-welfare recipients) – to finance this escapism.
What the HHS Mandate boils down to is the idea that some people have the “right” to avoid their own responsibilities by passing them on to others. This is a broad principle that has dominated liberal thought in America for nearly a century.
Personal responsibility is part of the beauty of the American Dream. It doesn’t just mean that you have to deal with your own mistakes; it also means that you get to reap the benefits of your own good choices and labor. When people stop being accountable for their own actions, they undermine the foundation for being rewarded on the basis of their deeds, as well.
———
NOTE: One more point is worth mentioning as well. In his statement – which was the most extreme and hostile toward conservatives of the entire group – Jon O’Brien said that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and their allies “will not rest until every single worker must ask their employer to use…sometimes life-saving contraception.”
This is patently false. Conservatives are not arguing that employees have to get permission to use contraceptives. That is absurd. What conservatives are saying is that a healthcare plan that covers contraceptives is an additional benefit. If employees desire contraception coverage, they should have to ask their employers for it, just as they would any other fringe benefit, such as dental insurance, a company car, or a few extra vacation days. No one is pushing to ban insurance plans that provide contraception coverage, just that these additional benefits not be legally mandatory.
Comment by Christian M. Stempert on August 1, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Reblogged this on Christian, Libertarian.
Comment by Susan Lowe on August 4, 2012 at 12:29 pm
This article is filled with misrepresentations of the HHS mandate and of the position of the Roman Catholic Church on contraception. The mandate does not require that contraceptives be provided for free. It requires that employee health insurance policies which employees PAY for include more than eighty vital health services without co-pay. That’s because non-partisan public health professionals have determined that those 80+ services will improve the health of Americans, extend their lives and reduce the crushing burden of health care costs in this country. It has been shown that removing barriers to obtaining those services, even a modest co-pay, results in people accessing those services in larger numbers.
The author’s oft stated and simplistic objection to addressing a public health issue in a rational way is that people can purchase “very effective” birth control from any drug store for a few dollars. First, condoms and foam are not “very effective”. A lot of people don’t even know how to correctly use condoms because very short-sighted religious zealots have driven fact-based sex education from high schools. On a practical basis, many people who are forced to rely on drugstore contraceptives don’t plan sex for Thursday night and Saturday morning in their own bedroom with access to the condoms and foam stored in their nightstand. I would bet that most sexually active adults did not have their first sexual experience under such conditions. Additionally, condoms break, people have latex allergies or bad responses to foam which is really not effective at all. As for the clinics that the author claims provide low or no-cost cntraceptives all over the country, those clinics are overwhelmingly run by Planned Parenthood which the author and his fellow ultra-conservatives are trying the very best to shut down. The pregnancy counseling centers the author refers to do not provide contraceptives. They exist to shame women into not having abortions and they won’t even discuss contraception with unmarried women. As with other religious zealots, shame and ignorance are the tools of their trade.
In one sense, the author is almost correct. The USCCB is not determined to force every woman to ask her employer for permission to use birth control although they will go there on the way to achieving their final goal. The leaders of the organization are, in fact, determined to make birth control illegal and inaccessible to every American. The USCCB believes that it should have veto power over public policy in this country (as the Roman Catholic Church does in other countries where the Church is more entwined with the government). The USCCB wants to use the government as it’s enforcement arm to impose its teachings on not just its members who have overwhelmingly rejected the birth control ban but on all Americans. It just amazes me that freedom-loving Americans are willing to allow the Roman Catholic Church to attain the power to enforce its religious teachings on every American through the power of the government.
Finally, this author makes it quite clear that the birth control controversy isn’t about religious freedom or forcing one person to pay for another person’s “lack of self-control”. It’s about punishing women for having sex.
Comment by Mark on August 6, 2012 at 4:36 pm
These comments by Ms. Lowe are so riddled with fallacious notions that I will only focus on one: the idea that the employees pay the complete cost of their health care. In our office of some 70+ employees the employees pay about 25% of their health care costs. We, as the employer, absorb the rest.
As Obamacare kicks in we will have to weigh the financials regarding whether it will be better to simply pay a penalty vs continuing very expensive health care coverage.
And, if we continue with employer coverage, we will also have to consider the morality of government forcing coverage of not only contraceptives but also abortafacients.
The arguments of Ms. Lowe really demonstrate the author’s contention that “What the HHS Mandate boils down to is the idea that some people have the “right” to avoid their own responsibilities by passing them on to others. This is a broad principle that has dominated liberal thought in America for nearly a century.”
This strain of thought has so inculcated American culture, thanks largely to the media, that it may eventually push us over the edge before most of us realize what’s going on.