Posted by AzBlueMeanie:
The true objection of the religious right to insurance coverage for contraception for women is that it leads to sex for pleasure rather than procreation, often outside of marriage between single adults. Fornicators! According to these "sex police," sex should only be between one man and one woman who are married to one another, and only for the purpose of procreation, never for carnal pleasure. I will assume always in the missionary position, under the covers with the lights off, just for good measure.
They are essentially anti-sex, because sex is a sin, don't you know, unless the above preconditions are satisifed.
With that in mind, I almost spit out my coffee this morning while reading the Tucson Weekly. Sen. "Don't make me angry" Frank Antenori brags about being a prolific fornicator in his his youth -- sinner! -- while failing entirely to comprehend health insurance or the concept of religious liberty. And this guy is running for Congress? Conservative Agenda | Tucson Weekly:
HB 2625, sponsored by Rep. Debbie Lesko, would allow any employer in the state to opt out of providing contraception coverage as part of health insurance if the employer has a moral objection to preventing pregnancy. [The bill failed on a 13-17 vote on Wednesday, but Sen. Nancy Barto promises to bring it back for a revote].
State Sen. Frank Antenori, who is running in the April 17 GOP primary in the special election to replace Gabrielle Giffords in Congressional District 8, said last week that he would support HB 2625 if it came up for a vote.
"Do you force someone against their will to provide something that they morally or religiously object to? That is a tough call, and that is what this battle is all about," Antenori said. "Like I told another lady who was upset about it, I said, 'What makes you think you're entitled to have someone else paying for it?' Nobody is stopping you from going out and getting contraceptives. I mean, when I was in high school, I paid for it all the time; I didn't have (any) trouble. It was kind of hard going up to the cash register."
Maybe you should have got yourself one of these condom vendo machines, Frank. And just how many young girls did you have sex with outside of marriage for your carnal pleasure? Were they of the age of consent? Have you ever heard of statutory rape laws? The "sex cops" of the religious right are going to want to know, Frank. You set a bad example for their children. And what rank hypocrisy: it's OK for me, but not for anyone else.
This helps to explain Frank's condescending attitude towards the woman in his story: 'What makes you think you're entitled to have someone else paying for it?'
Maybe you should learn something about private health insurance, Frank. I don't know of any employee who does not pay a premium for their health insurance and also pays a co-pay for prescription drugs. Almost all female contraceptives are by prescription. Women are paying for their contraception, Frank. Purveying this falsehood that taxpayers are paying for their contraception through private health insurance plans ought to get your ears boxed by the media, if they had any clue, and by every woman.
Government regulations requiring private health insurance plans not to discriminate against women by requiring insurance coverage for contraceptives does not mean that taxpayers are paying for it. The employee is paying a premium for their health insurance and a co-pay for prescription drugs, i.e. contraceptives.
As for this false flag of "religious freedom" argument, religious liberty means that one religion cannot impose its religious dogma on those of other religious faiths, or those who have no religious faith, by force of law. This violates the First Amendment's "free exercise" clause. One's exercise of "religious freedom" cannot deny the "religious freedom" of others, and certainly not by state action through force of law. But that is exactly what HB 2625 does. The "sex cops" of the religious right simply do not care.
There is also nothing in the Constitution that gives an employer, i.e., typically the legal fiction of a corporation, rights superior to its employees. All American citizens, which does not include corporations despite Citizens United, enjoy equal rights under the law. HB 2625 creates a tier of preferential rights for employers, and thus is unconstitutional.
Recent Comments