As a rule, I seldom talk about hot button issues on my blog. Main reason is directly due to a personal opinion that everyone needs a small safety zone in which one can go to and not worry about the real world giving them holy hell about certain things.
However, since both my blog feed and Facebook newsfeed is frothing and foaming at the mouth this week, I thought I would offer my two cents about it. And in case you've been one of the millions of people watching the World Cup, thus happily depriving yourself of the hypocrisy that the real world seems to thrive in these days, the US Supreme Court ruled on July 1st that certain businesses don't have provide certain types of birth control as required under ObamaCare.
As you can probably imagine, people on one side of the issue (i.e. women's rights, abortion rights, mandatory health insurance rights) are foaming at the mouth because of the ruling. You name the reason/rationale for the foaming, they probably got it covered.
However, righteous hypocritical indignation can only carry you so far, especially when you're confronted by someone who isn't part of your choir. As most of you probably know, I am not part of anyone's choir and over the years I've been hoisted by my own petard because I'm not part of anyone's choir.
But you know, sometimes pointing out a fact is just enough get a choir riled up, because let's be honest here, facts often have a nasty get in the way of righteous hypocritical indignation. Like the fact that Hobby Lobby actually does cover most forms of birth control. It just doesn't cover the "morning after" birth control pill, which is what everyone is working themselves into a rabid frenzy over.
That's right boys and girls. People are working themselves into a rabid frenzy over a woman's right to have a super early abortion. 'Course, I could be stretching this statement just a tad, but if you click on this link (yes, it's Fox News, because I'm sure CNN or MSNBC wouldn't let facts get in the way of hypocritical indignation), you'll see that I'm not.
With that being said, I will now step down from my soapbox so that some of you good people can step on it in the comment section and tell me why I'm either full of horse manure or that I'm actually making just a little bit of sense.
Oh, just one more thing: I used to be pro-choice, then eventually swung over to the straddle the fence. Which means that while I'm basically pro-life, I'm not hardcore pro-life. If it's a sincere matter of life or death of the mother, or the pregnancy was due to some heinous crime, then yes, the difficult choice must be made.
(c) 2014 by G.B. Miller. All Rights Reserved.
Darn those facts.
ReplyDeleteI didn't even know that pill was legal here. If other forms are covered, what's the fuss?
Alex: A woman's right to choose, a business using religion as a basis for not offering a particular type of coverage. Religious freedom. ObamaCare. Pick a reason and you'll find someone who will object to it.
ReplyDeleteI think you make a LOT of sense. :) Some of the stupidity I've read this week has been mind-boggling...
ReplyDeleteLisa: Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI lost a FB friend today because of it. Apparently my tone was a bit too sharp for her and she didn't really want to debate the fact or even acknowledge my points. No great loss though as she was more of writing network friend than anything else.
Most amusing to me is the number of people I have talked to via my job who are "against Obamacare" but are on Medicaid and/or disability. The same people who rant about taxes, yet don't pay any.
ReplyDeleteM: The tax part is what gets me at work, when people who make tons o'money via overtime moan and groan about extra taxes coming out if I should happen to miss a shift of overtime the previous pay period and have to put it into the next check.
ReplyDeleteEven better are the ones who go tax exempt for an extended period of time on both federal and state.
The more they get, the more they want...
ReplyDeleteI can see where Churches should have a religious grounds as an employer. Still seems like government butting into personal choices. It was a mandate to pay for insurance, then they say, but not that- next it'll be no Chemo for the elderly or something- less options for individuals n getting in their business I object to.
Snaggle: Exactly.
ReplyDeleteIt actually started around '08 when it was mandated that insurance companies had to cover children until they were 26. Previously the parent had to pay the difference when their child turned 19 but now they don't.
That issue is so difficult. I can understand both points of view. I'm glad that I'm not responsible for having to come to any decisions on what is most fair.
ReplyDeleteS.R.: I can too. Unfortunately, almost everyone is focusing on the religious exemption, instead of the fact that Hobby Lobby already covers about dozen different types of birth control.
ReplyDeleteWhat it really boils down to is that everyone wants everything to be covered, regardless whether or not a business wants to pay for it.