From Tom Jones
Regarding the article entitled, “The Conservatives’ War on Women’s Reproductive Rights by Christina Arreola, She states, “In a country that prides itself on being the ‘land of the free’ it has become apparent that such a statement does not apply to women and the choices they make concerning their bodies, specifically their choices about reproduction.
She then writes about Conservatives denying birth control to woman by not paying for it in their healthcare program. I believe that women have the rights to do what they want with their own bodies. However, I do not believe that they should want others to pay for it. She asks, “Could you imagine having to get ‘permission’ from your boss to use birth control covered under your health insurance?” No, I could not imagine it, but that is such an exaggeration that it is foolish to even consider it.
The question is should birth control be covered by health insurance. If it is a private company providing the coverage, it should be up to them to decide. If it is the government, then the answer should be no. Other people should not be required to pay for someone else’s birth control. In the article, Viagra for men is mentioned. While I don’t agree with paying for Viagra for men, there is a difference. Erectile Dysfunction is a medical condition which can be treated. Birth control is not.
Then, Viagra is compared to birth control as not preventing unwanted children in a country that’s “deeply in debt and bogged down by a 40% welfare dependency, 15% poverty rate and 8-13% unemployment rate” While unwanted children are a problem, they are not the reason that our country is deep in debt. In fact, I would think that an argument could be made that one of the reasons for the welfare dependency being so high is that many are deliberately having children to get more welfare or to qualify for welfare.
The article also mentions a bill in the House that would impose criminal charges on those who aid and assist a young woman in terminating her pregnancy without her parent’s permission outside of her home state. While I don’t like this bill, it doesn’t stop the young woman from getting an abortion in her home state without telling her parents. It is just another example of how this article distorts the truth to prove a point.
Then there is the proposed law in Virginia that would make it mandatory for a woman seeking to terminate her pregnancy to undergo a vaginal ultrasound prior to the procedure. She then says that this is by definition rape. Once again, I do not agree with this law and I agree with Christina’s argument that it is unnecessary and that external ultrasound does the same job. This is mentioned in the article just to outrage the reader and does not support the premise that Conservatives are at war with women’s reproductive rights.
Finally, the article states that conservative are hypocrites for displaying” their patriotism while they work to chisel away at the very Constitutional rights this country was founded on”. However, earlier in the article, Rush Limbaugh is described as a “notoriously insulting conservative talk-radio host” and then lambasted for calling Fluke a “whore” and comparing her to a “prostitute.” I am appalled that that he did this and do not condone it in any way. However, freedom of speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment and I do not see where birth control is mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.
Candidate for Congress District 3
Clark County Independent American Party Chairman.