Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

Tag: contraceptives

Aug.
17th

ELECTION: How far are you willing to follow Paul Ryan?

If you feel that you have the moral authority to tell a 90-year-old Alzheimer’s patient,“Mr. Reynolds, I’m taking away your Medicare benefits, but here’s a voucher so you can go buy yourself some insurance. Oh, and by the way, if you have any pre-existing medical conditions, the insurance companies may be unable to insure you. Mr. Reynolds? Are you understanding any of this?”

And if you feel that you have the moral authority to tell a young rape victim, “I know it’s tough, Mary, but you’ve been raped so now you have to make a decision. You can take the

Read more »

June
25th

RELIGION: Church trying to impose its beliefs

Re: “No one has to work for church” (letter, 6-22).

There is one huge flaw in the letter writer’s passionate but erroneous defense of the Roman Catholic Church’s so-called right to freedom of religion. He fails to acknowledge that we all have that right.

No one says that Catholics who don’t believe in birth control have to use it. However, that same right to religious freedom prevents the church from forcing its beliefs about birth control on others. It is also barred by law from discriminating against Americans who do not share their religious beliefs. That includes denying them

Read more »

June
19th

PLURALISM: Liberals aren’t the oppressors

Usually conservatives hide the differences between liberal and conservative values. But Michael Gerson (column, 6-19) freely admits how liberalism exalts the values of “equality and choice,” while conservatism seeks to conserve “exclusive, traditional … sectarian beliefs and hierarchical authority.”

But then Gerson dives into the conservative philosophical mire, stating that “liberal” government defends “individual rights against every form of oppression, public and private,” thus running roughshod over defenseless conservatives and their cherished hierarchy.

In contrast, he maintains, conservatives favor “pluralism” – government that tolerates traditional values and institutions – as long as they aren’t too offensive. So a conservative government

Read more »

March
16th

BUDGET: Family planning cuts would hurt low-income women

The $3 million proposed cut to family planning in the latest Senate Republican budget is unacceptable. With this cut, 12,500 low-income women in Washington state will lose access not only to birth control, but also to breast and cervical cancer screening and sexually transmitted infection testing.

Washington state cannot afford these cuts. With every $1 the state spends on family planning, the state saves $4.10 in maternity care. By cutting $3 million to family planning services, the state will end up spending way more in nine months as a result of unintended pregnancy care costs. Does this sound fiscally responsible?

Read more »

March
13th

BUDGET: Don’t cut family planning funds

Legislators in Olympia are now in a special legislative session, trying to balance the budget. Helped by three Democrats, Senate Republicans proposed a budget which suggests cutting 93 percent of family planning funding.

Knowing that every dollar spent on family planning services like birth control saves the state $4.10 in maternity costs from unintended pregnancies, where do these legislators think they will find the money they’ll need nine months from now to pay for maternity care? Cutting family planning doesn’t save money; what we “save” from any family planning cut, we pay four times over within nine months.

Legislators need

Read more »

March
13th

BIRTH CONTROL: Hope common sense prevails

Employer provided health insurance is a benefit that the employer has decided to offer (or has negotiated if the employees belong to a union). As far as I know, there is not a law that requires employers to provide health insurance.

But now it has been decided that if they decide to provide this benefit, “big brother” is going to tell him what has to be covered in the policy. If contraception has to be covered, what is next? Mandatory coverage of abortion?

What is an employer to do if his beliefs do not him allow to pay for such

Read more »

March
8th

BIRTH CONTROL: Debate boils down to basic fairness

Re: “GOP senators fail to reverse birth control rule” (TNT, 3-1).

The defeat of the Blunt Amendment proves that, to most reasonable Americans, birth control is not an issue. If the amendment had passed, employers could choose to opt out of covering not only birth control but any health service in the Affordable Care Act they deemed to be immoral.

Contraception is basic health care, similar to other preventative medicine such as medication for heart disease. This debate boils down to an issue of basic fairness and equity. Contraception is used by 85 percent of women at some point

Read more »

March
8th

BIRTH CONTROL: Fluke’s testimony misrepresented

Re: “Liberals’ hypocrisy is showing” (online letter).

After reading this letter attempting to reference the testimony of Sandra Fluke from Georgetown University before Congress, I found it to be another total misrepresentation of her words.

Her testimony was about other students’ problems obtaining reproductive health care and not about her problems. In her testimony she described a student who developed serious health problems as a result of not being able to obtain the necessary care.

What makes this letter even more preposterous is providing reproductive care can make health care less expensive for taxpayers and for everyone who has

Read more »