The “pill” is causing an overdose. “Contempt for women’s lives” seems a bit over the top.

The following is from a Time Ideas opinion piece entitled Men Have Sex Too:

After a month of increasingly intrusive attacks on the female body from Republican presidential candidates — and most recently from the state legislatures of Virginia and Texas — it’s clear we’re dealing with something more dangerous than mere policy debates. This is open contempt for women’s lives. When Limbaugh questioned where we “draw the line” with taxpayer money by comparing women’s health to buying sneakers, it struck a nerve in a lot of women who saw what their mothers and grandmothers knew all too well: society’s striking indifference to the risks and burdens women face from pregnancy.

A bit over the top don’t you think? All this over paying for contraceptives. If we were talking about denying mammograms or other important screenings or treatments, the point would be valid. If we were trying to make the case for 100% free coverage for important medication to treat a serious illness, the point would be valid. Not one article I have read, not one editorial or opinion column has even mentioned the irony of pushing for “free” contraceptives, but not for prescriptions needed to treat illness or sustain life for a man or women or child?

How can any reasonable person take “the pill” seriously as a medical issue? Talk about fairness, while we acknowledge the strain on all resources caused by health care costs, how can we seriously allocate resources in this manner? Logically, we should pay for free aspirin to help prevent heart attacks, etc. or gym memberships, nutritionists and diet programs to deal with obesity should we not (oops, I may have given someone some ideas)? Limbaugh and his comments may represent the worst of the extreme right, but for the left to accuse anyone opposed to “free” contraception of “attacks on the female body” is not only extreme, but laughable. The above statement talks about “comparing women’s health to buying sneakers.”

The fact is that paying for certain medical services is just like buying sneakers, it is money from your pocket to buy something. Whether it is buying sneakers, or shoes or contraceptive pills it is still money. It is hard to understand how the millions of working women and spouses of male workers covered by this legislation suddenly have no money to pay a co-payment or coinsurance for contraceptives. Seems to me that would be true only after giving up any number of non-essential expenditures and then finding there is no money left to pay for the pill.

I find it offensive that we are accused of “striking indifference to the risks and burdens women face from pregnancy,” especially when the best medical care possible is available to virtually all women when it comes to trying to become pregnant, being pregnant and delivering a baby. There is a plethora of specialist in this field and the vast majority of women pay their deductible, and coinsurance to obtain that care with the balance paid for by their fellow Americans. This seems a far cry from indifference. This point of view on the extreme left reflects the same mentality that wants us to pay for Columbia University college loans and closes its eyes to the global economy and its impact on middle class Americans in favor of demonizing the successful.

There are two words that come to mind: Personal and Responsibility.

Related articles

• Forget the “Pill” we need a new common sense pill for politicians. Now insurance companies will pay the full cost of oral contraceptives. (quinnscommentary.com)