But additional entitlements which focus much less on basic life and health and more upon the promotion of specific political agendas have been proposed and promulgated. On August 1st, 2011, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that as part of the implementation of Obamacare, they were requiring that new health insurance plans provide preventive health services to women at no additional cost to the patients. Specifically, they would have to cover women’s preventive services such as well-woman visits, breastfeeding support, domestic violence screening, and contraception without charging a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible. Here's the specific list:
* well-woman visits
* screening for gestational diabetes
* human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing for women 30 years and older
* sexually-transmitted infection counseling
* human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening and counseling
* breastfeeding support, supplies, and counseling
* domestic violence screening and counseling.
* FDA-approved contraception methods and contraceptive counseling
It is the latter service, "FDA-approved contraception methods and contraceptive counseling", that has attracted specific criticism from various pro-life lobbies. They claim it is tantamount to free birth control, and suggest it promotes irresponsibility and immorality.
In a letter to the editor entitled "Birth control with no co-pay will assist women at all levels", published on December 4th, 2011 in the Anchorage Daily News, Robyn Lauster, who signs herself as a member of Planned Parenthood, defends the HHS decision to require new insurance plans to cover birth control with no co-pays, suggesting that by making birth control affordable, it helps prevent unintended pregnancies and the need for abortion. However, Lauster undermines her argument with this disingenuous statement:
They [in reference to socially-conservative Republicans] wish to undermine this preventive care provision by allowing exemptions, even for organizations which employ and serve individuals of different faiths and backgrounds. It can't be right for an employer to dictate whether a woman can or can't have access to affordable birth control.
The latter sentence is false. No employer is dictating accessibility to affordable birth control. Women always retain the freedom to shop around for the most cost-effective services and products. Obviously, Robyn Lauster is advocating for a so-called "right to free birth control". It is the invention and proliferation of such artificial rights that has led to public funding measures which have increased our national debt.
The fact is, there are already two methods of free birth control for women. First, there's abstinence. Women know when they are fertile, and should be smart and disciplined enough to avoid vaginal intercourse during those times. Second, since there's usually a man involved in pregnancy, a woman can require a man to share the responsibility and the costs for pregnancy prevention. This means the man can wear a condom or take other measures to prevent sexual activity from resulting in pregnancy. Any man who refuses to wear a condom upon the request of a woman is merely trying to use her to gratify his selfish, vain ambitions, and has no interest in her pleasure.
One of the reasons why Planned Parenthood became so powerful politically is because the pro-life movement has been too nice and has made some compromises. For example, when we couldn't get a parental consent initiative for abortion passed, we backtracked and got a parental notification initiative passed. But even this compromise was unsatisfactory to Planned Parenthood; after the initiative passed and just before it was to take effect, Planned Parenthood sued, and the issue is still unresolved to this day. Planned Parenthood shows no respect for parental prerogative or the integrity of the family unit.
And that alone makes Planned Parenthood the enemy -- unworthy of public funding.