Anybody else been ruminating about this contraception broohaha? Throw in Rush Limbaugh, Obama, a left-wing activist, and some Catholic bishops, and it’s a real fiasco!
I need some clarity on this.
First of all, I’d like to posit that there is a difference between contraception and abortions. I know this, because I’ve used the first, and never used the second. One is designed to prevent a pregnancy; one is designed to kill a baby. Big difference.
But in this debate, the two have been lumped together. That’s because we’re dealing with the Roman Catholic Church here, and to them, both contraception and abortion are wrong, sinful, evil. Protestants might want to carefully carve their way through the issue.
I think it’s wrong for a religious institution to be forced to carry insurance on people, that will pay for things the institution believes are evil. It’s radically unfair, and breaks the consciences of all the people who head that institution. The government is forcing them to practice something opposed to what they believe. And even though I personally don’t think contraception is wrong myself, I defend the rights of those who think it is – I defend their right not to have to pay (in any way) for something against their beliefs.
However. I’ve even heard a friend lump the two issues together and say that insurance companies shouldn’t cover contraception – ever. What? I’m very thankful my insurance company paid for contraception when I was married, and we needed to delay having more children. We worked at a Christian school, and their insurance paid for it. But it wasn’t a Catholic school; it was Protestant. Big difference – again.
Which brings me to another point needing clarity. I understand that Georgetown University is a Jesuit school. I’ve heard of it: a rather impressive institution. I must admit that, until this past week, I was not even aware it was a Catholic school. As a matter of fact, if you’d asked me a month ago if Georgetown were a religious school, I’d have said, “No, I don’t think so.” If you’d asked me if it were a liberal school, I’d have replied, “Yes, I think probably so.”
And here’s my issue: if Georgetown University now wants to cry foul because someone wants them to pay for their rather loose-living students’ contraception, I must ask: why did they admit such students in the first place? And when these students demonstrate openly that they are practicing sinful lifestyles, why didn’t they kick them out? They’re a Catholic school, right? Don’t they believe that fornication is a sin? Can religious institutions restrict students from smoking/drinking/dancing/having sex? Yes, they can. Can they expel students when they do these things? Yes, they can.
Then how does Georgetown have a problem? It seems to me that the issue is not first whether someone requires the school to pay for contraception; it’s why they allow the sexually-active students there in the first place.
They could have a policy that dealt with this issue pro-actively. They don’t. I haven’t even heard anyone say this. I find it rather hypocritical of the school to allow the girl in, listen to her talk about the sin she’s committing, and then rant about … the birth control. Why don’t they rant about the sex? That’s an issue they could actually do something about.