Violet Socks at Reclusive Leftist has a terrific primer to help everyone understand that contraception is basic to health care, and that the Obama administration is not forcing taxpayers to underwrite birth control. The Obama administration rule is that insurance companies must provide birth control–you know, the insurance companies we pay money to so that they will cover our health care needs?
She elaborates on the especially stupid argument offered by some that contraception coverage means that women will be paid to have sex:
Insurance normally covers all kinds of medical expenses connected with sex and other voluntary activities. Bill O’Reilly complains that “men’s activities” aren’t covered, but they are. If men want Viagra so they can have sex, insurance covers it. If they get gonorrhea or syphilis or crabs from having sex, insurance covers it. If they get AIDS from having sex, insurance covers it. If they want to go skiing and need a cardiac stress test first, insurance covers it. If they need Diamox so they can go skiing in Aspen, insurance covers it. If they break their legs skiing, insurance covers it. If they need Simvastatin to lower their cholesterol because they won’t stop eating fatty food and red meat, insurance covers it. If they suffer a heart attack from all that fatty food and red meat, insurance covers it. If they need a nicotine patch to quit smoking, insurance covers it. If they get lung cancer because they won’t stop smoking, insurance covers it. And on and on and on.
Does this mean that men are being paid to have sex, to ski in Aspen, to eat sausage, to smoke or not smoke? No.
And let’s not forget: women seeking contraception are in the habit of having sex with men, of whom we could with as much justice demand sex tapes and accuse of wanting to be “paid to have sex!” Duh! What kind of non-celibate heterosexual man thinks that contraception shouldn’t be covered by insurance, when viagra, VD, sports injuries, lifestyle-inflicted injuries, and nicotine patches are?
When you think about it, contraception is undoubtedly the lowest-cost service to cover and the one that benefits the most people, men and women alike. But I realize that this is an argument made out of common sense, fiscal responsibility, and American notions of equality and justice, which are no match for misogyny. What are these nasty little men afraid of, I wonder?