ADVERTISEMENT

No reason for insurers to cover contraception

I’m writing in response to Froma Harrop’s Jan. 31 column wherein she comments that she can’t wait for the year 2040 because we won’t be talking about birth control due to its broad acceptance. Well, why are we talking about it so much now? Because it’s being jammed down our throats by our government.

For the sake of discussion, let’s take the religious aspect out of the Health and Human Services mandate. Why should everyone buying heath care insurance pay for someone to have sex? If people want contraception coverage for an optional activity, let them pay for it themselves. In contrast, if the elderly or sick need help paying for essential medication to keep them alive, shouldn’t we help pay for this before we pay for contraception? Should we wait for these people to eat pet food or starve?

How about dental coverage? Studies have shown that people who have adequate dental coverage are healthier and have less chance of heart problems. Shouldn’t we help pay for this before we pay for contraception? How about optical coverage? It’s an essential need for people to see in order to perform any function necessary for a normal life. Shouldn’t we help pay for this before we pay for contraception?

People, we have our priorities messed up. The majority of those who need contraception can afford it themselves. If they can’t, they should abstain or go to some agency where they can obtain it for free. There’s no need for the public to fund this in any manner. Let’s use the HHS mandate to help those in need instead of funding wants. We can’t afford it all. Let’s let the users of the health care plan vote on the needs they want covered instead of letting the government decide what’s best for us.

John Daigler

Williamsville