In response to Max Romano's commentary regarding the "right" to birth control, to which constitutional right does he refer? I searched my copy of the Constitution and could find no reference to any such right ("The right to birth control," Feb. 15).
There are so many holes in his argument I hardly know where to begin. Start with "reproductive justice," whatever that is. Men and women do indeed have control over their future, sexual or otherwise; it's called making responsible decisions, not depending on a government mandate.
Mr. Romano conveniently ignores the fact that there are numerous other "birth control" options available for both men and women that are well out of the purview of the heavy hand of government.
His belief that a government mandated option is "free" is priceless. He tries to buttress his argument for "free" contraception by claiming the pill has other uses. I'm not nearly as bright as the good "doctors-in-training", but I'm guessing that there are other treatment options available for his accessory uses for the Pill.
He and his compatriots jump the shark when they claim that employers can't deny their employees "safe and effective health-care." Of course they can: It's their business, their money and their insurance plans. Thousands of businesses don't provide insurance at all.
Thankfully, most savvy businessmen and women understand that it is in their interest to offer such health plans; otherwise they may not have the workforce needed to compete.
"Rights," "access," "justice" — holy smokes, I pray that that these paragons of progressive liberalism wake up and get in the real world. They have spent too long in the protected confines of the ivory tower.
Craig R. Piette, ReisterstownCopyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun