Selwyn Duke
Why accept contraception as a women's issue?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Selwyn Duke
October 31, 2012

While many points have been made about this campaign's contraception controversy, there's one that I haven't yet heard anyone mention.

Why do we accept contraception as a women's issue?

After all, there is a prophylactic designed for use by men, and insurance policies would have covered it no more than they would female birth control. Even more significantly, contraception is unnecessary unless there's the possibility of conception, something impossible without the participation of a man. In other words, contraception is always used by both sexes.

The likely response here is that I'm being obtuse. "Don't you know, Duke, that women generally have to assume the responsibility for birth control?" But hold the phone. The feminists have long maintained that men should shoulder half the burden of contraception and that thinking otherwise is "sexist." So why did they make that antiquated, "sexist" assumption an implicit centerpiece in their argument for government policy?

Additionally, the burden stressed when defending the contraception mandate is the financial one. But not only is birth control quite cheap, it isn't entirely true that this expense is footed only by the fairer sex. After all, if a man and woman truly are a couple, expenses are often a mutual responsibility. And not only is this especially true of married couples, it's also a fact that husbands are much more likely than wives to be the main or even sole income source. So is it primarily "female" or "male" dollars that pay for birth control? It would be interesting to see a study to that effect.

Of course, then there's the type of single woman targeted by the statist contraception appeal, the species known as the Fluke. Single women who have one-night stands or who enter into other low-commitment sexual relationships aren't going to collect tolls before allowing partners in lust to cross the bridge to nowhere, so they would have to pay to play (who, however, pays for the dates?). But this raises a question: is facilitating such behavior good social policy?

So our government funding has gone from midnight basketball to midnight...well, you know. Paying for people's healthful recreational activities was bad enough; now we have to finance their recreational sex. And since these tax dollars come partially from women, robbing the taxpayer to pay for contraception is as much a "women's" issue as is the use of it.

© Selwyn Duke

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

 

Stephen Stone
'The fervent prayer of the righteous'

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Stephen Stone
Flashback: Dems' fake claim that Trump and Utah congressional hopeful Burgess Owens want 'renewed nuclear testing' blows up when examined

Bruce Deitrick Price
K-12: Bugs? Or features?

Judie Brown
The trouble with Doctor Anthony Fauci

Paul Cameron
Has mental healthism created a Frankenstein monster?

Pete Riehm
Pursuing perpetual power by means of a permanent pandemic

Victor Sharpe
A good and Godly two-state solution – Not the ungodly outrages of Messrs. Obama and Biden

Judie Brown
Devoutly corrupt: Part two

Linda Kimball
Global oligarchy, forces of darkness, and the spirit of Antichrist

Madeline Crabb
Consequential judgment

Jerry Newcombe
Saving our national Hyde

Tom DeWeese
Cancel Culture: Psychiatry, education, and moral relativism = today’s children

Rev. Mark H. Creech
Cracker Barrel: No apple pie, but they got booze

Tom DeWeese
The gospel of Climate Change – Is Smart Growth racist?
  More columns

Cartoons


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons

RSS feeds

News:
Columns:

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites