Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

BIRTH CONTROL: Religion doesn’t get to call the shots

Letter by Lisa Forsberg, Tacoma on March 6, 2012 at 2:31 pm with 4 Comments »
March 6, 2012 2:31 pm

Re: “A much larger issue is at stake” (letter, 3-3).

The letter quoted the First Amendment as support for the viewpoint that laws affecting health care (contraception mandate) somehow negatively impact one’s ability to exercise one’s freedom of religion.

Ironically, the same quoted constitutional amendment is at stake in the eyes of those supporting the contraception mandate. In order to keep separate church and state, the government cannot allow religion or religious ideas to determine the law or enactment thereof (Larkin v. Grendel’s Den, 1982).

Laws regarding the rights of people can be disagreed with by church officials, but we cannot allow church officials to write laws with which the (majority of) people disagree.

A more controversial view of this debate is that it is not about religion; it’s about the government having its hands in U.S. health care. The best solution is to take health coverage away from employers or unions lest there be a religious/moral objection to any particular part(s) of the health coverage package.

Any employer would be ecstatic to pick and choose what it covers (refusing some items under the guise of moral objections) if it means more money for the CEO or shareholders. Why can’t U.S. citizens agree on one health care system and an appropriate way to practice it?

If the individual does not want a particular coverage (due to moral objection), then the individual should say so, not the employer.

Leave a comment Comments → 4
  1. Lisa, I was all set to disagree with your view of the birth control issue and the First Amendment, but then I read this sentence in your letter:

    “The best solution is to take health coverage away from employers or unions lest there be a religious/moral objection to any particular part(s) of the health coverage package.”

    and then this one:

    “If the individual does not want a particular coverage (due to moral objection), then the individual should say so, not the employer.”

    Okay. This looks like it could work! One Universal Health-Care Insurance Plan for All Americans: Let’s call it ObamaCare for short. But, lets pay for it all with Tax Dollars, so everyone is covered, with no exceptions. Then people can choose what health services they want and need.

    Let”s do it!!! Great ideas Lisa!!!

  2. LornaDoone says:

    Lisa, you can trust that a man, especially one tied to a religion will not see eye to eye with your rights being violated. Pay no attention and continue your message.

  3. The Republican Party tried to ram through the Blunt Amendment which would have allowed ‘anyone’ with ‘any’ moral objection to refuse ‘whatever’ coverage they did not want to fund to exclude it from their health insurance package.

    So, if my employer is a faith healer, then he could cancel the entire plan and hand me a Bible?

  4. LornaDoone is a loon, and is also Kardy in a dress.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0