When browsing some headlines I came across an article that said only 10 people showed up to an Obama campaign stop to hear Sandra Fluke speak (Obama was not with her). Sandra Fluke came to the national spotlight when Rush Limbaugh called her a slut for wanting the government to force insurance providers to cover free contraceptives. This has since been woven into the “War on Women” that liberals claim conservatives are pursuing.
So let me get this straight. Republicans hate women because they do not want to force private companies to pay for contraceptives, and because they are against forcing religious institutions to provide contraceptives, even though these religions are morally against providing contraceptives. By not paying for someone else’s birth control, you are denying their access to birth control. Apparently their right to contraceptives trumps your right to property, since your property will be confiscated through taxation to pay for their birth control.
Have people forgotten that contraceptives, birth control, and condoms are all available at your local CVS or Stop and Shop? There is no conservative picket line that women must fight through in order to purchase these items. If the expense is too much, I could suggest a couple of things: A) have less sex or B) make your boyfriend pay for them. If he can likewise not afford your contraceptives, it may be time for a new boyfriend. This is not a matter of access to healthcare, this is a matter of economy. The choices a person makes with their money allow them to decide what is important, and what is not important in their particular cases. If a person chooses to buy a $500 smart phone instead of a year supply of contraceptives, that is their choice. The unwillingness of a stranger to provide a person with birth control and condoms is not “denying them access” to these things, and it is certainly not an act of “war on women”.
Incidentally, I still do not have a smart phone–I wonder what type of phone Sandra Fluke has. I choose to spend that money on other things that are important to me, but for how long will I have the right to make that decision? I now am forced to buy health insurance, or pay a fine, regardless of whether I want or need health insurance at my age and with my health. These companies are also now forced to provide specific things in their healthcare, which cost more money, the costs obviously being passed on to the purchaser. Again, we are apparently not smart enough to make the choice of what our health plans should cover or not cover, so the government has stepped in and decided for us what our money will be spent on.
Couldn’t I just as easily spin my lack of smart phone as someone “denying my access” to information? Sure, I choose to spend some of my money on going out to bars and drinking, but at the end of the day when I don’t have enough money left over for a smart phone, shouldn’t someone else who has made enough money already step in and cover the costs? I am at a societal disadvantage because I do not have a smartphone, and my future is uncertain unless someone pays for me to have constant access to the internet. How will I compete in a competitive job market if I cannot constantly check my email, read the latest news, tweet, and play angry birds? The only solution is to force someone else to pay for my smartphone, because my money has already been spent–never mind that it was on alcohol and fast food (I wonder how much money Sandra Fluke spends on alcohol and luxury goods).
The “War on Women” is an absurd myth of the left. I am not denying people food by not buying them food, I am not denying shelter to people whose rent I do not pay, I am not failing to educate those whose schooling I won’t pay for, and I am not denying women access to contraceptives by refusing to pay for them. By this logic anything you can not afford has been denied to you by someone else who could have bought it for you. I have long been a victim of the extreme right’s policy of denying access to Ferraris, even though they know very well that I need to get to work!
The point here is that people make choices with their money, and should have to live with the consequences. If people as private individuals want to band together to start a charity and make sure no women goes without birth control, then fine. But do not force others to pay for these things under the guise of protecting women’s rights. The liberal aggressors in this case are the ones using force, by forcing individuals and organizations to spend their money on other people’s provisions. No one is forcing women not to use contraceptives, they are just refusing to pay for them on moral grounds.