Amazon.com Widgets

Should religious institutions cover the costs of birth control?

  • Yes, they should.

    If churches don't get to dictate whether or not someone gets heart surgery or gets medical attention at all (medical attention is against the beliefs of Christian Science followers, but you will never see them win a case where they don't have to provide insurance at all because of religious beliefs) then they shouldn't get to dictate if a woman uses birth control or not. Being against birth control goes against common sense, especially because most of them are anti abortion as well.

  • It is pragmatic

    It is a purely pragmatic option. Churches may not like that teens are having sex, but its very clear that teens are definitely having sex, largely backed up by the entirety of history. It makes sense to make birth control available today to people because its worth it in the long term.

  • No it is too important

    I do not think we should be spending less on defense. We would not have anything else if we did not have the proper defense. I think defense spending is among the most important spending we have today and would not oppose an increase if it was used to truly protect us.

  • No They Shouldn't

    I do not believe religious institutions should cover the costs of birth control. I believe birth control should be covered under any normal health insurance policy and it should not be handled separately. Secondly, I do not see why religious institutions should be expected to cover any form of medical care at all.

  • Up to them

    Whether or not religious institutions should or not buy birth conrol for their followers is up to how they feel. A lot of religious institutions look down on sex out of marriage, so they will not be wanting to buy birth control for women who are not married, or are young.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.