Steffi Badanes
Blogs Editor
Ever since the Obama administration announced that under the Affordable Care Act, the no-cost birth control policy would go into effect, intense debates and controversy have been stirring up. GOP members are up in arms, saying contraception coverage goes against the right to religious freedom. But what about the rights of women to affordable health care? Although these religious organizations say they are against contraception, the fact is, surveys show that 98% of catholic women have used birth control at some point during their lives. So by not covering birth control, religious organizations are denying a poor woman’s right to choose to use it or not. Some may be fortunate enough to still be able to make that decision. But for others, paying $100 a month for birth control may not be an option.
My question is, why should poor women have to pay for birth control out of their own pockets, while health insurance covers other various medical expenses? Conservatives like Speaker John Boehner say that forcing religious organizations to cover birth control is unconstitutional. I understand that birth control goes against the beliefs of some religions, but the United States has a separation of church and state. So that means if all employers have to provide birth control coverage to their female employees, religious organizations do too. Even though religious organizations don’t pay taxes, they still live under the law of the land, they still employ American citizens, so they should abide by the same laws as other businesses. But now the Obama administration has compromised, allowing religious organizations to be excused if birth control is against their religious beliefs (insurers would then have to provide birth control coverage without a co-pay). This way, religious organizations will be receiving special treatment, thus violating separation of church and state.
What really irritates me is that the use of birth control has turned into such a big political issue. First of all, denying women birth control coverage cannot be justified by religion. Like I said before, we have a separation of church and state, so not everyone lives by the rules of The Bible. So GOP members talking about President Obama’s “war on religion” is absolutely ridiculous. Second of all, the GOP stands for a limited government, so using the government’s power to deny women birth control goes against that belief. Third of all, this is about women and what they need to maintain good health. So there was absolutely no reason for a panel of only men to be discussing women’s access to birth control at the House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on Feb 16. When Democrats tried to get Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown law student, to testify, Republicans refused to let her speak her opinion because she was “not qualified”. That’s really shocking since I can’t really think of how a man could be more qualified to speak about women’s health than a woman. This is a women’s issue so I think it makes pretty good sense for women to be the ones voicing their opinions.
Had a woman been on the panel at the hearing, she probably would have brought up the fact that preventing pregnancy (thus reducing the need for abortions) isn’t the only purpose for birth control. Birth control is also used to treat ovarian cancer, ovarian cysts, endometriosis, and endometrial cancer. So if a woman is prescribed birth control to treat ovarian cancer, and can’t afford it since her employer won’t cover it, that’s it? There’s something seriously wrong with that picture. I’m glad that the Obama administration has taken measures to protect women’s health, but disappointed in those who neglect women’s rights to health care.
Video by ivolsky
Opinions do not reflect the views of NCHS Courant.
With all do respect, I fully disagree upon this issue. No matter how hard you may try to diverge the subject from religion, that is what this issue is concerning. Women’s rights is not the issue here. Religious organizations are of course well under the law of this nation, which also means that they have the right to their own religious beliefs and practices — one of which happens to be the non-use of birth control. For the government to force religious organizations to go against their faith to hand out free birth control at their expense is wholly un-American. Women can get birth control through their insurance at an affordable rate with either co-pays or premiums. Also, the Care Act states that insurance plans have the right to opt out of the requirement for providing birth control to their clients if they have moral objections. If insurance plans are allowed to not cover contraception — even though it’s required — because of random moral objections then why can’t religious organizations opt out as well for a substantial reason: faith? As for the sake of poor women — who have to be employed under a religious affiliated organization for this to even be an issue (which means they are making money) — there are qualifications in every state that allow women to apply to attain free birth control. This application is based upon their income, expenses, etc. and it is available nationwide.