I tweeted out this Big Journalism story on the trap Republicans were falling into on this whole birth control mandate issue, with the added commentary, “Focus, people. Focus.” It drew several questions and comments both on Twitter and Facebook that I felt were worth discussing. The issue is an important one, but it is important for reasons that 90% of the conversation on the topic is missing.
~~~
First, let me just say this. I love birth control. Love it. I think it’s awesome, and I’m glad my wife and I have access to it. I respect the faithful who have a religious objection to it, but I don’t agree with them. If a politician sincerely wanted to ban birth control, I would be against them.
But I don’t think I have a right to force someone else to provide it to me, and more than I should have a right to force someone else to pay for my beer or big screen TV or (heaven help me from ever needing them) ED meds or anti-balding tonic.
If a private insurance company is willing to contract with me freely and voluntarily to cover such things, then great! I’m for it. But if my insurance company doesn’t want to cover it, or if I don’t want to pay for it, I resent the holy hell out the government forcing the two of us into that transaction. What business is it of the government’s if I use birth control?
I don’t care for Republicans who focus primarily on social issues, because I fear Big Government in the Name of Jesus. (See Santorum, Rick.) Like many of my liberal friends, I don’t want the government in my bedroom.
But not even Rick Santorum is actually calling for a ban on birth control, in spite of the ignorant/dishonest memes otherwise.
So why are so many liberals these days insisting that the government get involved with their sex lives? What ever happened to “keep your laws off of my body!”?
~~~
A few years ago I wrote about that “keep your laws off my body!” disconnect:
And how about that old standby, “Keep your laws off my body!”? Ah, now THIS is an old protest sign worth deconstructing.
The most important word in that sentence isn’t “laws” or “body”. It’s “your”.
If liberals believed in liberty, the sign would just say “Keep laws off my body!” Liberals don’t have any problems whatsoever with laws being passed which regulate various bodily activities or functions at all levels, or they wouldn’t have passed Obamacare, implemented porn-o-scanners at our airports, or tried to ban table salt and Happy Meal toys. It’s not laws regulating every nuance of human conduct which bothers them, they just don’t want someone else making the rules. No one hates a despot like a jealous would-be despot.
And that – THAT – is why the federal government involving itself in private party contracts involving the even privater issue of birth control matters so much, and is resonating in this election year that is so fundamentally about whether we want to be free or whether we want to live in a gilded cage. It’s not about whether or not birth control is a good idea. It’s about power and control.
~~~
Liberals should be careful what they ask for. If the Obama Administration has the power to mandate insurance companies pay for birth control, a Santorum Administration would logically have the power to ban insurance companies from providing it at all.
If the federal government has the power to force you to buy birth control (or any other health care product), they have the power to make you take birth control. Or to regulate when you can and can’t use it. Hey – Secretary Sebelius has already indicated that the number of babies being born is a national economic issue (which would make the number of babies being born a matter for the government to regulate), and we ARE looking to decrease the deficit. And lest we imagine the days of the eugenics advocates were behind us…
I don’t want any President to have that kind of power over my life, no matter what their party affiliation.
If you ask someone else to pay for your stuff, that someone else gets to make decisions for you regarding that stuff.
That’s why I don’t feel sorry for the 30 year old political activist (aka, the poor, aggrieved victim-student) who was mocked by Rush Limbaugh. (In case you missed this whole dustup, that was the subject of the original post I linked to.) That woman is asking Limbaugh (and all the rest of us) to pay for her birth control, or at least asking Rush (and the rest of us) to pay for the guns pointed at the putatively private insurance companies that will force them to pay for her birth control. Why is it so out of bounds to inquire to the person demanding more of your money at the point of a gun what they want that money for in the first place?
That’s what this is really about. It’s not about whether condoms are moral or how promiscuous some chick is or isn’t. It’s about people demanding other people’s money, and then getting indignant when said other people balk at that demand. It’s about a culture of entitlement to things that aren’t yours.
Rush was foolishly crude and rude, but the affront to liberty that this entire contraception mandate represents (it’s a death by a thousand cuts) ought to be far, far more offensive to any person who loves freedom.
~~~
I was asked on Twitter if “[W]ouldn’t GOP defense of “religious freedom” have to include supporting Muslim burkas & other non-Christian practices?”
Of course it would! And it does, at least so far as I know. I have yet to hear about any Republican candidate for president call for the outlawing of burka-wear, and I would condemn them if they did. And I think I’m pretty well on record as being opposed to Big Government in the name of Jesus. Indeed, back in law school, I argued in favor of Muslim taxi drivers in Minneapolis who were facing regulation after refusing to pick up passengers carrying bottles of alcohol on religious grounds – and make no mistake, I am STRONGLY in favor of alcohol.
Just don’t ask me to pay for a burka.
I also really like bacon – and it even has a few health benefits! But I would be horrified if the government tried to force Jewish or Muslim butcher shops to sell it.
So is this really about religious liberty? Sure it is. But it’s not JUST “religious liberty” – it’s ALL liberty that’s at stake.
I don’t particularly care why you do – or don’t – want to pay for birth control, whether it’s for religious reasons or because you just love having kids. But I DO care that you be free to exercise your religion as you see fit, whether I agree with it or not. Because as soon as one government official can disregard a religious belief you don’t agree with, some other elected official can disregard your religious belief, and force you to violate it.
Indeed – the only time the Obama administration seems to have deemed the protection of the free exercise of religion worthy of his deference is when it’s Afghani Muslims rioting and murdering people over the accidental destruction of a Koran. He should be careful as to the incentive structure he’s creating here…
~~~
Finally, even if you have no philosophical problem with the government paying for or subsidizing contraception, which is in most cases not a life-or-death pharmaceutical, there is the fact that we simply can’t afford it.
We are broker than any nation in history has ever been broke. We’re out of other people’s money. And if we keep paying for things on the National Credit Card that aren’t absolute necessities, we shall ensure our economic demise.
If we keep going the way we’re going, the debate over who pays for someone else’s contraception will be moot, because there won’t be any more of other people’s money left to pay for anything – including things we actually need and that it’s government’s job to provide, like cops, roads, firefighters, schools, a military, etc.
I think that one of the reasons both sides in this debate are allowing themselves to be distracted with the narrow pros and cons of birth control itself are because most of them cannot accept just how dire our economic and geo-political situation really is.
We live in scary times. It’s time for our leaders – or would-be leaders – to get focused on the real issues.
So I’ll say it again.
Focus people. Focus.
