One of the stranger provisions of Obamacare (the wishfully named Affordable Health Care Act) is that any health care plan offered must include contraception and even abortifacients (medication which induces a miscarriage, i.e. the “Morning After” pill). Some people are against contraceptives, but such people need to have their sanity and intelligence checked. You think God hates contraceptives? There does not appear to be any evidence to support that, and even if it were so, what makes it YOUR job to enforce God’s will? You think not having easy/cheap access to contraceptives will prevent people from having sex? Really? What planet with no humans on it did you come from? Check into a reality clinic and take a social history course.
Abortifacients are a bit different. If a person believes that killing a baby is wrong, then it is quite reasonable for them to believe that a pill which kills a baby is wrong. And if you can prove that immediately after conception there is, in fact, a “baby”, then attempting to make abortifacients illegal would be a reasonable goal. Until you can prove that, you are perfectly justified in never using them yourself, but again, it is not YOUR job to prevent other people, with differing beliefs, from having access to them.
Back to Obamacare. By adding contraception and abortifacients to health care, it “redefines” sexual activity as “medically necessary”, and pregnancy as a “disease”. Now, teen boys have been preaching the medical necessity of sexual intercourse for quite a while, but perhaps we should realize that just maybe they have an ulterior motive. Where is any valid research that shows that no or inadequate frequency of sexual relations is physically or even mentally harmful? What prevents a rapist from claiming his crime was “medically necessary”?
In addition to the “redefinitions” implicit in the Obamacare mandate, it requires, by law, every health care plan to “cost more”. There is no way under the law for a person to buy health care which does NOT include the costs for these requirements, even if they “do not need” or “are morally opposed” to them. Even more disturbing, is that a person who does not need contraceptives or abortifacients, must still pay for them, and in fact, is subsidizing other people’s sexual activities.
Christian owned businesses such as Hobby Lobby sued on this ground, and the Supreme Court agreed with them, that they could not be forced to provide these services as part of their employee health care package. End of story, right?
Dream on. People in Congress are already making noises about “overturning” the Supreme Court decision by passing new laws. I wonder what part of “supreme” they are having trouble comprehending? If this law is unconstitutional (and it is, per the definition of the Supreme Court’s function), than any law passed attempting to do the same thing will also be unconstitutional. And then there are the “useful idiots” who are protesting outside of (and in some cases, inside of) Hobby Lobby. Get a clue, morons. Hobby Lobby does not hate you, or women, or sex. They just have different beliefs than you do, and insist on the right to follow those beliefs. Just like you do. And they don’t want to have to pay extra to subsidize some or even all of their employees in their following of differing beliefs. What is unreasonable about that?
Sexual activity is “fun” and each person should be responsible for the costs of their own fun. And any unintended results.