biomimetical (biomimetical) wrote in thequestionclub,
biomimetical
biomimetical
thequestionclub

In an opinion letter in my local newspaper, a person stated that requiring religious institutions to purchase government approved healthcare plans - ones that happen to cover sterilization and contraception - were a "violation" of his beliefs and "the first step toward the government decreeing what all citizens must believe and support".

I wanted to write a rebuttal and included the line: "Paying for health insurance that also covers birth control does not imply that one supports it any more than paying for car insurance would imply that one supports drunk driving." Obviously that was a bad analogy.

I have three analogies and I can't decide which one:
1. Paying for health insurance that also covers birth control does not imply that one supports it - it implies that you have the compassion not to exclude the many people who do not share your faith but desperately need that healthcare.

2. Paying for health insurance that also covers birth control does not imply that one supports it any more than paying taxes would imply that all taxpayers support Congress members' six-figure salaries.

3. Paying for health insurance that also covers birth control does not imply that one supports it. When you've paid for an airline ticket that includes a television, you might not watch it - but boy is it a luxury for the family with small children who need that distraction.

Which do you think is best?

If you're interested in commenting on my full letter, here it is:
Yesterday, J.M. Mac Donald insisted that requiring religious institutions to purchase government-approved health insurance plans that also cover contraception and sterilization were "a violation" of their beliefs and "the first step towards government decreeing what all citizens must believe or support". This is absolutely ridiculous. Paying for health insurance that also covers birth control does not imply that one supports it [can't decide what to put here].

A 2011 study by the Guttmacher Institute reported that nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization, the birth control pill, or an IUD. Should health insurance companies start excluding birth control and sterilization techniques, then, to keep the remaining 30 percent happy? What about other religious beliefs? How would Mac Donald like to pay for a blood transfusion out of pocket, since such a procedure is abhorrent to Jehovah's Witnesses? Why not just get rid of health insurance altogether?

It is wonderful and important to keep your faith with you as a patient. Healthcare providers will always respect it and adhere to your wishes. But when it comes to healthcare policy, please leave your personal bias at the door.
Constructive criticism would be great.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 19 comments