Via Donald Douglas, I saw this gem concerning Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA):
Boxer: Why doesn’t Hobby Lobby oppose Viagra?
posted at 12:41 pm on March 25, 2014 by Ed Morrissey
Behold one of the most chronically misinformed members of the US Senate surprising utterly no one with the extent of her insight into the Hobby Lobby case. Barbara Boxer appeared on MSNBC this morning to declare her support for the HHS contraception mandate, claiming at one point that it protects the religious freedom of employees. As Twitchy captured in this segment, Boxer then goes on to challenge Hobby Lobby’s owners for hypocrisy for not opposing insurance coverage of Viagra for men … which even flummoxes Boxer’s MSNBC interviewer:
First and foremost, Viagra (and other erectile-dysfunction drugs and treatments) aren’t widely covered by insurance. That’s one reason why a large online market for inexpensive purchases of the drugs exist. Second, as anyone who gives a moment’s thought about the subject would realize, such drugs would be appropriate to help empower natural procreation, which isn’t against anyone’s religion, last I checked. Lastly, and this is a more minor point, Boxer ignorantly invokes the Catholicism of the plaintiffs in this court hearing, when none of them are actually Catholic.
The religious objection is to contraception and sterilization, and in the Hobby Lobby case, it’s narrowed to a specific kind of contraception — abortifacients. Boxer blithely dismisses the distinction and blathers about the employer taking away the woman’s right to choose her form of contraception — which is nonsense. Just because an employer refuses to subsidize that choice does not mean they are forbidding it or blocking access to it. It’s the same kind of “war on women” double-talk that assumes that employers have total control over the private choices of their employees, when the existence of an independent salary demonstrates the exact opposite. No one gets paid in company scrip any longer, and haven’t for a century or so.
It’s utter drivel, and its source is unsurprising, to say the least.
More at the link.
There are two very important facts which the left are trying to hide here:
- If the Supreme Court sides with Hobby Lobby, it would mean that employers would not have to provide health insurance which covered contraception, but employers still could include such coverage if they wished. Some employers might conclude that including contraceptive coverage was a wise idea, in that it might reduce pregnancies among its workers and their families, thus leading to less time off taken by those employees.
- If the Supreme Court sides with Hobby Lobby, it would not make contraception unavailable; it would simply mean that employers would not have to provide no-copayment contraception coverage as part of their health insurance plans. As we noted here, even Planned Parenthood has said that birth control pills will run between $15 and $50 a month. Contraception is inexpensive and widely available in this country, and that would not change.
Senator Boxer, as you might expect, didn’t have the first clue that the Obama Administration regulations concerning health insurance don’t require health insurance plans to cover Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs, and thus the comparison was worthless. Companies could choose to have their health insurance plans structured to include those medications, just like they could choose, if Hobby Lobby wins, to cover contraceptives, and that’s just fine with me: such is an exercise in liberty. But, of course, the American left are pro-choice on exactly one thing.