On Monday, talk show radio host Rush Limbaugh apologized on air for referring to Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown law student, as a “slut” and a “prostitute.” Fluke gave testimony to Congress in favor of wider contraception coverage for women in America, which Limbaugh equated to asking to get paid to have sex.
While even other conservatives such as John Boehner and Newt Gingrich denounced Limbaugh’s offensive language and several companies pulled advertising from his show, Limbaugh’s comments are still reflective of a nation that can’t entirely get behind the idea of including contraception coverage in health care plans.
Progress is being made, but not without resistance.
Here’s the lowdown: Last year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services instituted a policy that requires all private institutions to provide, without demanding extra payment, contraception coverage for women in their health care plans.
Religious organizations opposed to the use of birth control rallied against the policy, so the Obama administration compromised with them. Religious institutions that are opposed to providing contraception coverage in health care plans must inform employees where they can get coverage elsewhere, and they cannot be charged more than the rate for the company insurance plan.
But Reuters reported that Catholic bishops remain displeased with the policy because they believe having to refer employees elsewhere to get contraception coverage still infringes upon their freedom of religion.
Just like Limbaugh, these unsupportive religious institutions don’t really understand what the issue is about.
Not all people who work for Catholic organizations may be opposed to contraception, even if they themselves are Catholic. And, while people like Mitt Romney may believe that companies are people, an individual’s personal health needs should always come before a company’s moral or religious mandates.
Having access to birth control does not prevent a single person from following any religion. Until someone who is against contraception on religious grounds is forced by law to physically ingest birth control pills, no one’s rights to religious freedom are being infringed upon.
So what about the employer’s religious rights? Simple. Employers opposed to contraception won’t use it, and will leave employee’s personal affairs out of it.
Though Limbaugh may have a difficult time understanding this, most people don’t want contraception health care coverage so they can have sex. It’s a money issue.
With doctor’s exams and monthly payments, birth control can cost up to $1,210 per year without insurance, according to the Center for American Progress. For many people, that’s not affordable. Nor is an unplanned pregnancy. Why should anyone be denied access to birth control because of an employer’s religious beliefs?
Not to mention that the required coverage provides more than just contraception. It also includes free screenings for gestational diabetes, testing for HPV in women over 30, counseling for HIV and STIs and even screening for domestic violence.
These are things all employers should want for their employees.
Yes, religious freedom is built into the Constitution, but it was never meant to be used as a weapon. Religion is not under attack from this policy — women are under attack from its opposition.
Religious freedom is for everyone, including the people who don’t want to be denied their rights because of someone else’s beliefs.
Weighing the cost of being a student
