Tuesday, July 1, 2014

Employer/Employee Paid/Unpaid Birth Control Benefits Scuffle--SCOTUS Decides, a Rare Right Decision

Hey now (Howard Stern's greeting), here are all the
sanctimonious, red-herring, truth-deflecting rationales at
work, pro and con: who pays for an employee's
birth control? Are these companies really religious, deeply
so, in fact, that they can't stand abetting by payout a
woman's (and her sex partner's) wish to contain
reproduction? I think not; it's merely a way to save
some on benefit monies paid.

A female howl now goes up: the giant corporations are
now in my bedroom, men still trying to control our bodies,
etc. While that may still be true in some quarters, women
are not actively being barred from obtaining birth control;
if one druggist denies this service, go to another! If your
employers won't pay for your birth control method, pay
for it yourselves! Planned Parenthood currently lists
the "pill" monthly tab at between $15 and $50. I live on
$12,000 a year and I could afford that.

Condoms, foam, the "pill": I paid for them all when I was
sexually active, with never a thought that anyone else
should pay for my intimately personal products. The only
persons obligated to buy such items are the sex partners
THEMSELVES. It is simply no one else's business...period.

The Supreme Court made the correct decision, a rare right
one lately, considering Citizens United and a long litany of
stupid, illogical and unjust votes. Still, Associate Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg is no fool, with her 35 page dissenting remarks
about creating a minefield full of future problems, precedent
being what rules (when rule IS actually employed) in our land.

We've entered the political arena (-AGAIN), with
Left vs. Right, Men vs. Women, ad libidinum, ad nauseam,
et al. Fractious fodder will fly, from now 'til November
2014 and beyond (-!).

P.S.: This has needlessly become a political and
religious football.
To women: You can choose to have/not have sex, but not
cancer--that is why birth control is not a medical benefits
issue or right, even though a doc writes Rx for the "pill".
To corporate execs: I don't believe in your denominational,
"devout" devotional denials. This is a money matter, that's IT.
To the Catholic Church: stop promoting overpopulation!
We don't need, and the Earth cannot support, the nine
billion souls projected to live on the planet by about
2050. The Holy Bible said be fruitful and multiply;
we've been there and done that, over, and over, and ....

When will reason, honesty and care constitute the
greater opinion and  policy we proclaim? --Coming
to our world anytime soon?

I'm still waiting.


  1. Lady Amber.

    AMEN!! TO ALL YOU HAVE STATED! Yeah CONTROL OF WOMEN;S, MINDS, BODIES, AND EVEN their souls is what many ( NOT REAL MEN like Me THE COMMANDER! but corporate, elite etc one) Yes MY GOD! You said it all.

    WOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Cutting to the chase and telling it like it is and offering realistic solutions. YOU DID THAT! Congratulation and thank you so much, AGAIN! LETS FIGHT ALL THIS CONTROL, esp of GOD;S ( I feel best creation, WOMEN.

  2. Well, Amber, we could well wait an eternity and a half for reason and good will to prevail.

    In regard to your sex-versus-cancer statement, you have a point. But I don't get the sense that money was ever an issue with the Hobby Lobby's founding family; it was about imposing their religious values on their employees. Consider this: What if a devoutly fundamentalist Muslim employer insisted that all his female workers wear hijabs?

    That stated, I concur with you in regard to Justice Ginsberg's dissenting remarks. Even though this ruling was narrowly defined, it could "open the floodgates" for further rulings from this intensely ideological court.

    As for the state of our national health care, this particular case would have been academic if we had a single-payer system like the majority of the industrialized universe.