This is a response to some posts on Facebook regarding providing exemptions to religions organizations and religious corporations from providing Contraception Insurance in their health care plans. I say NO!
I'm going to cop out a little on my response and not attempt to offer the many arguments on why this is a bad idea. Many have written and spoken on the many reasons why this should not be permitted based on a variety of cogent arguments - medical, social, economic, legal, religious. I'll offer a couple not too cogent thoughts.
Thought 1 - Where does this end? Lets delve into some reductio ad absurdum. Lets say a religion objects to blood transfusions, or organ transplants, or vaccines, or any form of medical care. Opps... all of those are not absurd cases. These are all current religious objections to medical treatments. Should an employer be able to exclude insurance coverage to any or all medical procedures? If a contraception exemption is permitted why should other exemptions not be permitted?
I'll try again for something absurd... Lets say a religion objects to chemo therapy because cancer is obviously a type of cell that grew naturally in the human body and therefore cancer is part of god's plan and should not be disturbed in any way. Can the employer who subscribes to this belief be able to exclude chemo therapy from their health plan?
How about an employer who wants to include treatments in their plan. Lets say an employer requires that all male employees must be circumcised? A new male employee must "drop trou" for the HR director to prove they are circumcised. If they are not circumcised, the company offers free circumcision through their health insurance. In order to be be employed, the male job seeker must submit to a free circumcision procedure. I know, absurd, but would it be permissible? And, yes of course someone could "always" find another job. (rhetorical question no need to answer)
Thought 1.5 - What happens when an employer previously held one set of religious beliefs and then converts to a new religion with a new set of beliefs?
Thought 2 - This particular contraception insurance issue touches on many more issues that involve religious belief (including the interaction of religion, government, morals and ethics). Here is another cop out. I'd prefer not to delve into any more religious discussions unless the person I'm talking to has read their sacred religious text cover-to-cover at least once. (I'm not talking about a periodic study of select sections of the text at "church" meeting or study group. I'm talking about the entire text cover-to-cover - from start to finish.) AND - also that the person has read at least four of the books out of the ten books at the top of the this page:
http://www.christianitydisproved.com/books.html
(I've read the sacred text of the employers engaged in this contraception case - twice. Ok - I'll confess, on my second read I skipped Numbers and Judges. And I've read multiple versions of the gospels and commentaries on the gospels. Spent two semesters studying the bible in college. I think have a basic knowledge of their belief system and its workings.) I would ask that the person I discuss religion related issues offer some level of understanding of my lack of a religion. That is why I've requested reading some of "my" texts.
As I started this - many others have spoken much more eloquently on the problems with the exemption being granted. I encourage more research on this topic, maybe my objections will be better understood. Maybe not.
