Catholic mother admits she has questioned her faith — and believers respond by heaping abuse on her

First topic message reminder :

Sonia Guizar used to attend mass regularly and teach at a Catholic school. But her Catholic employer’s refusal to cover birth control brought her an ill-timed pregnancy and a child with developmental challenges that stretch her family thin. When she publicly shared her experience and questioned Church teachings in a Washington Post story, what she got was a heap of abuse from fellow Catholics whose urge to defend religious dogma and authority trumped their kindness and compassion. Guizar’s story may be a very distant echo of the horrendous slaughter being perpetrated by Jihadis shouting “Allahu akbar!”—but it is an echo nonetheless. One of religion’s most heinous characteristics is that it elevates defense of faith above compassion, inspiring mean and aggressive behavior in the names of gods.

The American Supreme Court is considering a “religious freedom” claim by a Catholic charity, the Little Sisters of the Poor, that wants to deny contraception coverage to employees in their chain of nursing homes—mostly working poor women who can ill afford either out-of-pocket birth control costs or a surprise pregnancy. They further want to block the same employees from gaining access to free contraception via an “opt out” mechanism, a religious exemption already established under Obamacare. With the case making news and drawing protests, Guizar shared her own experience of needing birth control that she and her husband couldn’t afford. Fearing she would be fired by her Catholic employer if she tried to get the IUD recommended by her doctor, Guizar and her husband tried to make do with “natural family planning” and ended up pregnant. Their son, born from that pregnancy, has developmental delays and requires therapy multiple times weekly; and the whole ordeal has caused her to question her faith.

Her story is both ordinary and heartbreaking, and most people reading it would ache for her. But in dozens of comments, Catholic defenders of the faith saw fit to instead question either the legitimacy of her devotion, or her strength or integrity:

This is such an obvious hit piece–no catholic would ever say “I no longer celebrate mass” every catholic knows that only a priest can celebrate a mass. [not true]

You couldn’t afford birth control? Really? That’s ridiculous [not true] . . . . And you call yourself a ‘devout’ Catholic and NOT following their doctrine? Again, you don’t know what either devout and/or Catholic means. —Angie Sharp

Then you really were not a Catholic to begin with. Now you just write really dumb stuff! Congratulations you are progressing. I’m sure God will forgive your idiotic apostasy.—Wasachnorth [See No True Scotsman Fallacy]

The Apostle Paul was shipwrecked, tortured and thrown in different jails. You? Well you were told to not use birth control and your faith crumbled. —Give-me-Liberty

The amazing and great thing about America is that you can change your employment! Yes, I know it sounds incredible, but it can be done! If The Church has a tenet that you do not agree with, and it does, then you can adopt a creed more to your liking or get another job. Problem solved. —Steve Fotos

Go find another job. You signed an employment agreement. —Robert PS

I can’t believe this lady ever was a devout Catholic, she may have though she was, but it is obvious she has little understanding of faith and a great understanding of the secular world. . . . If she were really a devout Catholic she might try to follow the example of Mary in saying yes to God, instead of the example of Eve who said no to God and yes to the Snake! —Yvonne Yadler Bean
#
Natural planning is just as effective as any other birth control method. [not true—1 in 4 annual pregnancy rate vs 1 in 2000.] . . . . If you really are devout catholic, you should known what the church teaches and if you don’t like it work somewhere else. —pattyanna

Sonia is missing the boat as a “devout” catholic. She says she would have as many children as God intended but cant afford??????????? If her faith in God is solid, then he will take care of the financial “burden” that comes with having kids. As a fellow Catholic . . . .—Hannah Pharis

Perhaps you should read the bible again. JOB would have loved to have been hit with the issue of contraception as opposed to having this faith tried by the loss of his entire family! But you are devout? —Jane1000

If you don’t like your faith because your employer doesn’t pay for contraceptives, than you’ve never had one in the first place. Go demagogue somewhere else.—Pete r Gray



There are many morals or themes that could be drawn from Sonia’s story: The enormous human cost of the Vatican’s anti-contraception stance, especially when it leaves families struggling to care for children with developmental issues (think Zika). The fact that a modern IUD or implant (both of which have bonus health benefits) can be life changing for a woman and her family. The crass dishonesty of any person or institution claiming to be a friend to the poor (or “Little Sister of the Poor”) while denying poor families the means to delay or limit childbearing. The fascinating psychology of religion that compels people to lie to themselves and others once they accept a dogma. The fact most American Catholics follow their own conscience and use modern contraception at some point despite Papal edict. The fact that Catholic tradition itself is conflicted about individuals making this decision.

But during a month of jihadist violence—executions in Ivory Coast, a bombing in Brussels and a bombing in Istanbul, all by people who see themselves as defending the one true faith–what strikes me most about Sonia’s story is the mundane cruelty of her detractors, the fact that even on a topic as ordinary as family planning or a setting as minor as a Washington Post comment thread, religious belief has the power to trump humanity’s deepest shared ethic—the Golden Rule—and our most cherished moral emotion: compassion. I have written in the past about “religion’s dirty dozen,” twelve really bad religious ideas that have made the world worse. The idea that religious beliefs themselves matter more than love and kindness, more than our shared humanity, should be at the top of the list.

Valerie Tarico is a psychologist and writer in Seattle, Washington. She is the author of Trusting Doubt: A Former Evangelical Looks at Old Beliefs in a New Light and Deas and Other Imaginings, and the founder of www.WisdomCommons.org. Her articles about religion, reproductive health, and the role of women in society have been featured at sites including AlterNet, Salon, the Huffington Post, Grist, and Jezebel. Subscribe at ValerieTarico.com.


http://www.rawstory.com/2016/03/catholic-mother-admits-she-has-questioned-her-faith-and-believers-respond-by-heaping-abuse-on-her/


Hence why again religion does little good and is hugely damaging

As a teacher at a religiously affiliated school between 2007 and 2015, my health insurance was managed by the archdiocese. It didn’t cover contraception. We were told that the plan was in line with the beliefs of the church.

She was very well aware that the plan didn't cover contraception, so if she didn't want more children she should have changed her job, paid for contraception herself, or not had sex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/22/i-was-a-devout-catholic-not-being-able-to-get-birth-control-shook-my-faith/

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's about employment issues, it shouldn't be an excuse for you to spout your hatred of religion.

They are the ones spouting hate to a woman, I think you will find

Second US companies do offer health insurance so the company if it does not is failing this woman completely

Religions are a desease

They're giving their opinion, like you do. You sit here spouting hatred all over this forum every day.

Raggamuffin wrote:

As a teacher at a religiously affiliated school between 2007 and 2015, my health insurance was managed by the archdiocese. It didn’t cover contraception. We were told that the plan was in line with the beliefs of the church.

She was very well aware that the plan didn't cover contraception, so if she didn't want more children she should have changed her job, paid for contraception herself, or not had sex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/22/i-was-a-devout-catholic-not-being-able-to-get-birth-control-shook-my-faith/

Which again does not excuse the company, especially if religiously orientated

Why they religion should play no influence

Companies like that should be heavily fined if they based things off religious gibberish

It does have to be said, that given she is catholic, it seems reasonable that she aught to have been aware that a catholic employer would not approve of birth control....

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


They are the ones spouting hate to a woman, I think you will find

Second US companies do offer health insurance so the company if it does not is failing this woman completely

Religions are a desease

They're giving their opinion, like you do. You sit here spouting hatred all over this forum every day.

Its as plain as day they are being hateful, only a Christian apologist would claim othewise

Lord Foul wrote:It does have to be said, that given she is catholic, it seems reasonable that she aught to have been aware that a catholic employer would not approve of birth control....

But that employer should not base their contract of employment based on myths

That is discrimination by the employer to non-Christians

Didge wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:It does have to be said, that given she is catholic, it seems reasonable that she aught to have been aware that a catholic employer would not approve of birth control....

But that employer should not base their contract of employment based on myths

That is discrimination by the employer to non-Christians

She went to work for them, and she agreed to the contract. She was free to leave if she didn't like it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

But that employer should not base their contract of employment based on myths

That is discrimination by the employer to non-Christians

She went to work for them, and she agreed to the contract. She was free to leave if she didn't like it.

They are discriminating based off religious gibberish

Its inequality

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She went to work for them, and she agreed to the contract. She was free to leave if she didn't like it.

They are discriminating based off religious gibberish

Its inequality

She had freedom of choice, and she chose to work for them, and then complained because she didn't keep her legs together. That wasn't their fault.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

They are discriminating based off religious gibberish

Its inequality

She had freedom of choice, and she chose to work for them, and then complained because she didn't keep her legs together. That wasn't their fault.

That is irrelevant
The company is discriminating based off religious beliefsnd backing is
What you are also saying and backing is discrimination with those they employ as well

This is what religious schools do as well, take on those they want to based off religious discrimination


On all counts they should fold the company

All that some of the people who commented were saying is that she clearly wasn't a devout Catholic if she wanted to use birth control. That is not the same as saying she's not a devout Christian of course. She doesn't have to be a Catholic to be a Christian. If someone doesn't like the Catholic teachings, they are free to not be a Catholic whilst remaining a Christian.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She had freedom of choice, and she chose to work for them, and then complained because she didn't keep her legs together. That wasn't their fault.

That is irrelevant
The company is discriminating based off religious beliefsnd backing is
What you are also saying and backing is discrimination with those they employ as well

This is what religious schools do as well, take on those they want to based off religious discrimination


On all counts they should fold the company

So you want a company to be banned because you don't like their views.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

That is irrelevant
The company is discriminating based off religious beliefsnd backing is
What you are also saying and backing is discrimination with those they employ as well

This is what religious schools do as well, take on those they want to based off religious discrimination


On all counts they should fold the company

So you want a company to be banned because you don't like their views.

Its not views, its inequality and yes they should be stopped from trading

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

So you want a company to be banned because you don't like their views.

Its not vies its inequality and yes they should be stopped from trading

Well it will go to court and we'll see.

Meanwhile, the woman has another job - something she should have done in the first place if she didn't like the contract with this company.

moreover...what ever happened to individual responsibility???

I mean...just how much DOES a packet of johnnies cost in the states???

Lord Foul wrote:moreover...what ever happened to individual responsibility???

I mean...just how much DOES a packet of johnnies cost in the states???

Who is to say they were not using johnnies

You do realise they are not 100% effective?

What is cheaper out of either by the way

The condoms will be far more expensive

She said they weren't using them, she said they relied on "natural family planning".

The legal issue is whether or not the organisation is exempt from providing insurance cover for contraception.

This women is using a legal issue to complain about the beliefs of the Church which she was voluntarily part of. That's a separate issue.

Raggamuffin wrote:She said they weren't using them, she said they relied on "natural family planning".

Again do you know the costs of condons?

Again the company is backward and should be either fined heavily or folded

There is no place for inequality in the world today and the view Victor is making shows how out of touch he is on the cost of condoms,. when she should have been given free health care.

Raggamuffin wrote:The legal issue is whether or not the organisation is exempt from providing insurance cover for contraception.

This women is using a legal issue to complain about the beliefs of the Church which she was voluntarily part of. That's a separate issue.

She has every right as the company is discriminating based off myths

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:She said they weren't using them, she said they relied on "natural family planning".

Again do you know the costs of condons?

Again the company is backward and should be either fined heavily or folded

There is no place for inequality in the world today and the view Victor is making shows how out of touch he is on the cost of condoms,. when she should have been given free health care.

It depends on whether they're exempt from the usual rules about health insurance re contraception, or whether those rules were in existence when she started work with them.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Again do you know the costs of condons?

Again the company is backward and should be either fined heavily or folded

There is no place for inequality in the world today and the view Victor is making shows how out of touch he is on the cost of condoms,. when she should have been given free health care.

It depends on whether they're exempt from the usual rules about health insurance re contraception, or whether those rules were in existence when she started work with them.

,
They should not be exempt full stop because there is no evidence to religious mumbo jumbo

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It depends on whether they're exempt from the usual rules about health insurance re contraception, or whether those rules were in existence when she started work with them.

,
They should not be exempt full stop because there is no evidence to religious mumbo jumbo

Perhaps you should write a letter to Congress about it then.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:
,
They should not be exempt full stop because there is no evidence to religious mumbo jumbo

Perhaps you should write a letter to Congress about it then.

Will have no need to if Sanders gets in

Thank goodness we do not listen to any Christianity bullshit anymore in this country

Amen to that, which is an Egyptian God lol

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Perhaps you should write a letter to Congress about it then.

Will have no need to if Sanders gets in

Thank goodness we do not listen to any Christianity bullshit anymore in this country

Amen to that, which is an Egyptian God lol

It didn't happen in this country - as far as I know, Mr Sanders would have no authority over the laws in this country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraceptive_mandate_%28United_States%29#ACA_mandatory_coverage_for_contraceptives

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Will have no need to if Sanders gets in

Thank goodness we do not listen to any Christianity bullshit anymore in this country

Amen to that, which is an Egyptian God lol

It didn't happen in this country - as far as I know, Mr Sanders would have no authority over the laws in this country.

Good think too, as the company would have been massively fined for discrimination

The US is behind the Uk in equality, in time religious idiots will not be able there also to impose their buillshit

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It didn't happen in this country - as far as I know, Mr Sanders would have no authority over the laws in this country.

Good think too, as the company would have been massively fined for discrimination

The US is behind the Uk in equality, in time religious idiots will not be able there also to impose their buillshit

Such an issue wouldn't arise here because we don't need insurance cover for contraception here.

Raggamuffin wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraceptive_mandate_%28United_States%29#ACA_mandatory_coverage_for_contraceptives

Disgusting that they allow myths to have an exemption

They should make it a hanging offense

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Good think too, as the company would have been massively fined for discrimination

The US is behind the Uk in equality, in time religious idiots will not be able there also to impose their buillshit

Such an issue wouldn't arise here because we don't need insurance cover for contraception here.

Yes we have a national Health service which the US need to adopt

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraceptive_mandate_%28United_States%29#ACA_mandatory_coverage_for_contraceptives

Disgusting that they allow myths to have an exemption

They should make it a hanging offense

You want to kill people for their religious views?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Disgusting that they allow myths to have an exemption

They should make it a hanging offense

You want to kill people for their religious views?

Kill?

No, just make it punishable by the death penalty

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You want to kill people for their religious views?

Kill?

No, just make it punishable by the death penalty

You want someone else to kill them then. Don't want to get your own hands dirty huh?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:

Kill?

No, just make it punishable by the death penalty

You want someone else to kill them then. Don't want to get your own hands dirty huh?

And you are very to easy to wind up ha ha

See ya loser

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You want someone else to kill them then. Don't want to get your own hands dirty huh?

And you are very to easy to wind up ha ha

See ya loser

Reported for baiting.

I read the story on Raw Story, and I found the original article by Valerie Tarico but there's no link to the alleged "abuse" which took place. If there's no link to it, perhaps it didn't happen?

Jobless Oddball wrote:

Didge wrote:

You have offered zero to counter my points other than think you are in a Pantomine

Are you saying that Raggamuffin is the back end of a horse????????????????????????????????????????

You're new, aren't you?

So welcome.

And also, any more goading and baiting of posters won't be tolerated.
If you're not here to debate then you're not fit to be here.

Please have a look at our rules.

THE whole issue is a "storm in a teacup"...

THE great majority of companies, and health insurance providers, in the great majority of countries do NOT provide cover for contraception...

NOR is there amy sane and rationale why they should !
(After all, the woman is living in the US; not Africa or India..).

Contraception is not a general health issue, anyway..
It is a lifestyle choice --  it is also discriminatory, pure  and simple...
IF an employer is to cover womens' lifestyle choices, then why don't they provide the same cover for men ?
After all, no doubt there's a few women out there who would prefer that their husbands took the initiative..

AS both Rag's and LF have pointed out, it was this woman's choice to still take this job, knowing what health cover she was getting...

THIS whole thread reeks of nothing more than yet another infantile effort on the l'il ol' Dodgers part to bait and stir up some of the Christian and more level headed/clearer thinking elements on here..

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THE whole issue is a "storm in a teacup"...

THE great majority of companies, and health insurance providers, in the great majority of countries do NOT provide cover for contraception...

NOR is there amy sane and rationale why they should !
(After all, the woman is living in the US; not Africa or India..).

Contraception is not a general health issue, anyway..
It is a lifestyle choice --  it is also discriminatory, pure  and simple...
IF an employer is to cover womens' lifestyle choices, then why don't they provide the same cover for men ?
After all, no doubt there's a few women out there who would prefer that their husbands took the initiative..

AS both Rag's and LF have pointed out, it was this woman's choice to still take this job, knowing what health cover she was getting...

THIS whole thread reeks of nothing more than yet another infantile effort on the l'il ol' Dodgers part to bait and stir up some of the Christian and more level headed/clearer thinking elements on here..

Interesting, so not only are you an islamist apologist you now back Catholicism hatred:


Her story is both ordinary and heartbreaking, and most people reading it would ache for her. But in dozens of comments, Catholic defenders of the faith saw fit to instead question either the legitimacy of her devotion, or her strength or integrity:

This is such an obvious hit piece–no catholic would ever say “I no longer celebrate mass” every catholic knows that only a priest can celebrate a mass. [not true]

You couldn’t afford birth control? Really? That’s ridiculous [not true] . . . . And you call yourself a ‘devout’ Catholic and NOT following their doctrine? Again, you don’t know what either devout and/or Catholic means. —Angie Sharp

Then you really were not a Catholic to begin with. Now you just write really dumb stuff! Congratulations you are progressing. I’m sure God will forgive your idiotic apostasy.—Wasachnorth [See No True Scotsman Fallacy]

The Apostle Paul was shipwrecked, tortured and thrown in different jails. You? Well you were told to not use birth control and your faith crumbled. —Give-me-Liberty

The amazing and great thing about America is that you can change your employment! Yes, I know it sounds incredible, but it can be done! If The Church has a tenet that you do not agree with, and it does, then you can adopt a creed more to your liking or get another job. Problem solved. —Steve Fotos

Go find another job. You signed an employment agreement. —Robert PS

I can’t believe this lady ever was a devout Catholic, she may have though she was, but it is obvious she has little understanding of faith and a great understanding of the secular world. . . . If she were really a devout Catholic she might try to follow the example of Mary in saying yes to God, instead of the example of Eve who said no to God and yes to the Snake! —Yvonne Yadler Bean
#
Natural planning is just as effective as any other birth control method. [not true—1 in 4 annual pregnancy rate vs 1 in 2000.] . . . . If you really are devout catholic, you should known what the church teaches and if you don’t like it work somewhere else. —pattyanna

Sonia is missing the boat as a “devout” catholic. She says she would have as many children as God intended but cant afford??????????? If her faith in God is solid, then he will take care of the financial “burden” that comes with having kids. As a fellow Catholic . . . .—Hannah Pharis

Perhaps you should read the bible again. JOB would have loved to have been hit with the issue of contraception as opposed to having this faith tried by the loss of his entire family! But you are devout? —Jane1000

If you don’t like your faith because your employer doesn’t pay for contraceptives, than you’ve never had one in the first place. Go demagogue somewhere else.—Pete r Gray


lol why am I not surprised

Again a company that discriminates based on religion and bee the forum dunce supports inequality
In a time when we need birth control the useful idiot advocates discrimination

go figure lol

I'd still like to know where the comments came from, and how anyone knows that they came from Catholics.

Raggamuffin wrote:I'd still like to know where the comments came from, and how anyone knows that they came from Catholics.

Well its very obvious they came from Catholics, or do you think that they are all saints now?

Quite appalling comments and all I see is a defense of inequality

No surprise on your part being the fact you are prejudiced based on your vile religion

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I'd still like to know where the comments came from, and how anyone knows that they came from Catholics.

Well its very obvious they came from Catholics, or do you think that they are all saints now?

Quite appalling comments and all I see is a defense of inequality

No surprise on your part being the fact you are prejudiced based on your vile religion

How is it obvious? I've said that she's clearly not a devout Catholic, and I'm not a Catholic. How am I prejudiced? I'm not a fan of Catholicism. My religion isn't vile - you're just envious because you lost your own faith.

Raggamuffin wrote:

As a teacher at a religiously affiliated school between 2007 and 2015, my health insurance was managed by the archdiocese. It didn’t cover contraception. We were told that the plan was in line with the beliefs of the church.

She was very well aware that the plan didn't cover contraception, so if she didn't want more children she should have changed her job, paid for contraception herself, or not had sex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/22/i-was-a-devout-catholic-not-being-able-to-get-birth-control-shook-my-faith/

Well, yeah.   I'm not sure why she's blaming everyone else for her pregnancy.   She could have purchased her own contraception surely?   Saying The Church Made Me Do It these days is just ridiculous.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She was very well aware that the plan didn't cover contraception, so if she didn't want more children she should have changed her job, paid for contraception herself, or not had sex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/22/i-was-a-devout-catholic-not-being-able-to-get-birth-control-shook-my-faith/

Well, yeah.   I'm not sure why she's blaming everyone else for her pregnancy.   She could have purchased her own contraception surely?   Saying The Church Made Me Do It these days is just ridiculous.

Exactly. I can't be doing with these silly people.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

She was very well aware that the plan didn't cover contraception, so if she didn't want more children she should have changed her job, paid for contraception herself, or not had sex.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/22/i-was-a-devout-catholic-not-being-able-to-get-birth-control-shook-my-faith/

Well, yeah.   I'm not sure why she's blaming everyone else for her pregnancy.   She could have purchased her own contraception surely?   Saying The Church Made Me Do It these days is just ridiculous.

And that shows how little you understand not only Catholicism and the hold it has on people, the fact also not everyone in the US has loads of money and again excusing the hate directed at her, or the fact this company is discriminating based on religious grounds

But hey you only seem concerned at LGTB inequality

Let me let you into a secret, all inequality is wrong

Lord Foul wrote:

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Why should an employer pay for birth control anyway? What people do in their own homes isn't their responsibility. She didn't have to tell them if she got free contraception, or she could have paid for it herself. Alternatively, she could have kept her legs together.

Of course an employed should pay for birth control
We live in a world where the population is spiraling out of control
That is why there is a mass population explosion in Africa based on Catholicism teaching

do YOU know of any employer HERE (in the uk) that pays for birth control?

The issue is completely different in the U.S., where most health insurance is private and employer-provided. I'm assuming that the NHS handles birth control in the UK, but when you're dependent on your employer for health insurance, shouldn't the employer's plan include coverage for birth control?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

do YOU know of any employer HERE (in the uk) that pays for birth control?

The issue is completely different in the U.S., where most health insurance is private and employer-provided. I'm assuming that the NHS handles birth control in the UK, but when you're dependent on your employer for health insurance, shouldn't the employer's plan include coverage for birth control?

Exactly and this is blatant discrimination

Thank goodness for a Yank for a change who actually knows the issue in the US

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

do YOU know of any employer HERE (in the uk) that pays for birth control?

The issue is completely different in the U.S., where most health insurance is private and employer-provided. I'm assuming that the NHS handles birth control in the UK, but when you're dependent on your employer for health insurance, shouldn't the employer's plan include coverage for birth control?

People can buy condoms and other kinds of birth control in shops you know.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

THE whole issue is a "storm in a teacup"...

THE great majority of companies, and health insurance providers, in the great majority of countries do NOT provide cover for contraception...

NOR is there amy sane and rationale why they should !
(After all, the woman is living in the US; not Africa or India..).

Contraception is not a general health issue, anyway..
It is a lifestyle choice --  it is also discriminatory, pure  and simple...
IF an employer is to cover womens' lifestyle choices, then why don't they provide the same cover for men ?
After all, no doubt there's a few women out there who would prefer that their husbands took the initiative..

AS both Rag's and LF have pointed out, it was this woman's choice to still take this job, knowing what health cover she was getting...

THIS whole thread reeks of nothing more than yet another infantile effort on the l'il ol' Dodgers part to bait and stir up some of the Christian and more level headed/clearer thinking elements on here..

It's a real issue. In the U.S., more than half of women who take birth control pills take them for health reasons other than preventing pregnancy: http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/other-reasons-to-take-the-pill

For a health insurance company not to cover a needed treatment is clearly unfair.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:

do YOU know of any employer HERE (in the uk) that pays for birth control?

The issue is completely different in the U.S., where most health insurance is private and employer-provided. I'm assuming that the NHS handles birth control in the UK, but when you're dependent on your employer for health insurance, shouldn't the employer's plan include coverage for birth control?

People can buy condoms and other kinds of birth control in shops you know.

See my reply to Wolfie.