The focus is clearly on whether or not Obamacare is pushing contraception for all or whether or not Republicans want to restrict women’s access to contraception. This is not the latest volley against the pro-life crowd, nor is it the end goal.
First, we look for the beginning of the Obama administration’s new strategy. It is not when the Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that Obamacare would force Catholic organizations to violate their fundamental beliefs and provide, if not at least pay for, contraceptive services. Nope, that wasn’t the beginning.
The start, at least during the current Presidential administration, was in a Presidential debate. George Stephanopoulos, prior Clinton White House adviser, tried to push Mitt Romney on whether or not states could ban contraception.
During and shortly after the debate, many were left scratching their heads at the odd line of questioning – “why would George ask such a ridiculous question?”. Now, we know. This was to plant the idea that it could happen, that it might happen and that it would be the Republican candidates that would do everything in their power to prevent every woman from having absolute reproductive freedom (a terrible, semantically-overloaded term).
Why are the Democrats backing off of Abortion and making contraception an election year issue? Republicans have no problem with women buying the pill, diaphragms, rubbers, nuvarings, implants.. whatever. There is no anti-contraception lobby, anti-pill party or down-with-diaphragms PAC. It’s because they’re admitting defeat on publicly-funded abortion and need to try an end-around.
Remember Planned Parenthood? Remember the fights around Obamacare funding for abortion? Those are the battles they lost. Now, they’re playing to win – the presidency and a toe-hold on future pro-abortion regulations.
They can’t get abortion funded by taxpayers – they’ve been trying. So now the fight is to get contraception paid for by taxpayers to pave the way for “free” abortions for all.
Some are yelling contraceptive freedom, equal healthcare rights for women and numerous other irrelevancies. The Constitution does NOT provide for rubbers, the pill, spermacide or anything of the sort. In fact, it doesn’t provide for health care at all.
The progressive liberals are doing what they always do – advance the argument past the base point and get everyone to argue over the small points. The real issue is that while life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are protected by the framing document – me paying for anyone else’s pursuits is not .. at all.
Another way of putting is it how it was put in a short conversation in the movie “The Rum Diaries”. A character says, “suppose you want to raise taxes by 5%. You might propose raising taxes by 10%. The people will run about and yell about it. You’ll say let’s compromise, say 7% and perhaps land at 5 – exactly where you intended.” That is what this whole contraception mess is about – asking for more and settling for less as a road to having it all.
That’s the crux of it all. While a bastardization of the general welfare clause may somehow protect a women’s ability to abort unborn babies, it does not force me to pay for it. While being equal in the eyes of the law may mean that contraception should be available, it does not force me to pay for someone else’s desire to have sex without consequences. Having a right simply means that the government may not prevent your from pursuing that freedom. The government is not required to gift wrap it and deliver it to your front door.
A right is simply something that may not be taken away or infringed. It is not the same as an entitlement, where someone should expect that it will be provided. The second amendment secures my right to own a gun, it does not require taxpayers to buy me one – nor would I ever expect that they would. Understand the difference – it will be paramount to surviving the onslaught on our rights and sensibilities that the left has planned for the coming months. This is only the beginning.
-un-change, re-hope, success in 2012
Rich Mitchell’s opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Conservative Daily News, Anomalous Media, its staff or.. anyone elseRich Mitchell is the Sr. Managing Editor of Conservative Daily News. His posts may contain opinions that are his own and are not necessarily shared by Anomalous Media, CDN, staff or .. much of anyone else. Find him on twitter, facebook and google+