I am exasperated with the birth control debate.
I don’t even really like calling it that because it seems inaccurate. What exactly is being debated?
Religious rights, women’s rights, health, traditions, government intervention and economics. These are really at the heart of this debate.
Religious organizations that provide health insurance to their employees are incensed that under Obama’s new health law they would be required to offer coverage for family planning. Being raised Catholic, I understand that you say “family planning,” and everyone instantly cries, “No! The pill is evil!”
First, the pill is not evil. In fact, its uses for health purposes extend far beyond the primary use as a contraceptive because it is simply a concoction of hormones in pill form.
Second, family planning isn’t just the pill. It also includes things like helping women with fertility issues and sex education.
Saying this shouldn’t be a requirement because the pill can be used for stopping unintended pregnancies is like saying Planned Parenthood should be completely defunded because some of their branches offer abortion services. Contrary to popular belief, not all Planned Parenthood offices offer abortions. Mind blown?
The other problem with this debate is that religious organizations are trying to say they don’t want to do it because this is an attack on religious freedom, protected by the first amendment. How about women’s rights which are protected by morals?
There is a plethora of studies showing that one of the leading factors in gender equality and the economic well-being of a country is the ability of women to control their reproduction. The other leading factor is education. Both of these show a correlation to improvements in children’s and women’s health.
This isn’t a religious issue. And although I’ve made a couple of arguments for women’s rights—I’m female, sue me—that’s not really what the issue is here, either. Ultimately, it’s a public health issue.
There is one other thing that bothers me about this whole debate: where’s the compromise? Where is the good will showing that we as a people are ready to accept other ways of being?
I understand the Church’s desire not to support birth control. It is against the tenants of the Catholic faith, and although I disagree with it, I respect the right of other Catholics to believe in it wholeheartedly. That said, I can’t believe that all the employees of Catholic universities and hospitals are also of the Catholic faith. What about their rights?
In arguing government intervention, what about church intervention? Really it’s just trading one institution’s dogma for another.
Here’s my suggestion: stop bickering. I believe that Catholic organizations should have to offer the family planning, but that doesn’t mean the employees have to accept it. This should be a personal choice; it shouldn’t be forced on anyone by any institution, governmental or religious.
The Stony Brook Press
Latest posts by The Stony Brook Press (see all)
- The Pull List: May 3rd - May 4, 2013
- Stony Brook University Tops NYIT 6-4 - May 4, 2013
- Farewell Editorial - May 4, 2013
Thank you!
The situation of religious liberties, along with the freedom of the general populace, is a sad one (and it is only continuing to worsen). I am for separation of church and state although i am a devout Catholic. The role of the church in the world scheme is one of moral guidance and counsel. Not direct politics or debates. The church has no more right to demand a law be passed backed by religious doctrine, but neither does the Government have the right to interfere with church organizations. I feel that the cold hard facts have not been lost within this issue, they were never even present. This is a debate attempting to force catholic NON-PROFIT organizations to pay for services that they consider MURDER. It is not a choice between one groups morals over another, It is an attack by the government and a defensive move by the church. I could be wrong about this but i believe Amish amongst a couple other religious groups are excluded from ObamaCare. The effect of this will not only be to provide contraception to women, It forces these non-profit organizations to either discriminate who they hire, change what they hold to be as truth (that abortion is MURDER), or be overburdened with legal fees and prosecution to the point where they can no longer provide whatever service they previously did (normally these are amazing services that are performed efficiently). This is indeed a women’s health issue, but it is not a debate deciding what the best health care plan is to pass, it is an offensive move against the morals of passive, peaceful organizations. It is amazing how the rallying of the church to attempt some form of defense has been twisted into looking like a greedy power-play.