Happy Saturday, everyone! At the outset, please note that I'm not prolific at writing/blogging. The title of my blog tells it so. Like others, I remain a student of life, still learning every day. Thanks for your understanding.
This morning as I was in the restroom, while listening to our alarm-clock-radio on NPR, as usual, I thought about this ongoing debacle about religious freedom and the Obama administration's controversial mandate of providing female contraceptives by employers to their employees, in connection with the so-called "Obamacare" or the universal health care coverage that the president advocated and was passed by U.S. Congress a year or two ago? This contraceptive policy has caused a stir not only among the Catholic Church community but also other Christian groups as well. Then, just yesterday, there was this "contraceptive" compromise or policy revision brought out by the current administration to "accommodate" religious groups like the Catholic Church.
So what came to my mind this morning? It's this "questionable" thought: Is this issue on providing and funding of contraceptives to female employees (of religious or other employers) not supposed to be a personal matter, a personal choice because of a lifestyle that some, if not many, concerned women choose to have? Why should the government mind or interfere with this business for our female population? Why should it dictate employers/companies, especially Catholic institutions, to provide contraceptives to their female employees to the point that such government policy violates their religious beliefs/rights? It doesn't make sense for a Catholic employer, i.e., a hospital, school/university, to pay or provide contraceptives to its employees the fact that a Catholic employer stands by its teachings of preserving life and not aborting or extinguishing life. If the government interferes with this women's issue, on dealing with unwanted pregnancies, then, I would certainly assume that the government is not pro-life. It condones the culture or practice of anti-life. What do you think, folks?
(This is an update: I just learned lately from someone whom I met at a DMV office this past weekend, 18February2012, about the government funding or subsiding funds on the use of "Viagra" (or other drugs) to help adult male population/patients experiencing or having problem with ED (erectile dysfunction). If this is true, my stance on this issue is this: government should not fund this kind of program because, to me, this is a personal choice and a personal problem for concerned individuals. If such individual/patient wants to enhance his (sexual) performance, he should fund whatever medication/drugs he needs to accomplish his goal/s. It should come from his pocket, and not from the government's, the fact that this is a personal choice/matter.)
I believe that using contraceptives is a personal choice, or a lifestyle that the individual concerned should be responsible. Since this is a personal matter, the individual woman should pay for her contraceptives. If she wants to use pills so she won't get pregnant, that's her choice; that's her problem, not the government's or others' problem. If she wants or chooses to have sex and not want to get pregnant, she should pay, out of her pocket, for all methods, devices, medications that she uses. That's her business. She herself has to fund her contraceptive use. She has to take responsibility and accountability for what she does. That's her life. She has the choice. Then she has the voice to say it's my responsibility, not the government's or others'. First and foremost, she should not rely on government or others for help, especially with regard to this personal matter. Since it's a personal choice, a lifestyle that she chooses to have, she should pay for the consequences of her actions, choices, and decisions. Please, folks, don't misconstrue me. I don't have anything against the government nor the feminist movement. I'm not against feminism or sexism. I believe in religious freedom, and freedom of speech. This is my take about the issue.-chris a. quilpa, 11February2012