Summer Savings! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Contraceptives rule: A clear affront to the First Amendment

Judging from all the articles in The Sun recently, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, columnist Dan Rodricks and many others are wondering what all the fuss is about regarding the Catholic Church's strong opposition to requiring hospitals and schools to offer health insurance plans that provide contraceptives at no charge. They are missing the point.

The issue is not this particular type ofwomen's healthservices. In fact, as Mr. Rodricks stated correctly, many practicing Catholics disagree with the Church's opinion on birth control. The flash point is the government's intrusion into matters of conscience — a clear affront to the First Amendment, regardless of the particulars involved.

Until now, I have been proud of my government's stance on protecting and extending religious and human rights. This is the first time I have witnessed a reversal and removal of a right — and the first time I actually fear my government for setting such a precedent.

I know I'm not alone. Surely the Church and the administration can reach a reasonable compromise.

I have voted Democratic most of my life, sensing it to be the "party of protection." But this is a game-changer. Much as I abhor the thought of a Romney White House, many people like me would consider that now.

Clark Brill

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • School birth control makes parents' jobs harder

    School birth control makes parents' jobs harder

    It is the parents' job to teach their children right from wrong. At the very least, schools should not be making the parents' job harder ("Amid teen pregnancy decline, debate renewed about birth control in schools," June 6).

  • Little Sisters' employees have rights, too

    Little Sisters' employees have rights, too

    The Founders wisely gave us the First Amendment so that the followers of one faith could not force others to live their lives according to that faith. They had already seen how religion could be the basis for so much suffering. The case of the Little Sisters of the Poor and the Affordable Care...

  • Teens have a right to birth control

    Teens have a right to birth control

    As two organizations committed to increasing access to reproductive health care services for all Marylanders, we were glad to see The Sun highlight the availability of contraceptives in school-based health clinics ("Amid teen pregnancy decline, debate renewed about birth control in schools," June...

  • Little Sisters treated shamefully

    Little Sisters treated shamefully

    President Barack Obama's federal government has scored another big win in its war on religion in the United States, which used to be a nation under God ("Federal court rules against Little Sisters of the Poor," July 15). We should be ashamed of our court system as well as this "government" pledged...

  • Pills don't prevent STDs

    Pills don't prevent STDs

    This letter is in response to Susan Reimer's column about the GOP's attitude about birth control ("On birth control, young Republicans get it," April 15). I think Ms. Reimer's opinion is very narrow-minded. While I agree that young people often have premarital sex with no desire to procreate, I...

  • Stokes, like many before him, is wrong on birth control

    Stokes, like many before him, is wrong on birth control

    Readers Diana Philip and Spencer Hall were right to call out City Councilman Carl Stokes for his characterization of teen access to contraceptives as "a racist policy targeting African-American youth" ("Teens have a right to birth control," June 11).

Comments
Loading
81°