Yesterday I was glad to see the presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney make the following statement when asked about the Blunt bill, which would give your employer the right to refuse to offer health care which covers female contraception.
“I’m not for the bill. But, look, the idea of presidential candidates getting into questions about contraception within a relationship between a man and a woman, husband and wife, I’m not going there.”
Spot on. Presidential candidates should never get into questions about contraception. That's between you and your doctor. Not you and your presidential candidate. Not you and your employer. Not even you and your insurance company. And certainly not between you and your pharmacist. Contraception is your decision. Period. (And you can take that word to mean something different, since that's exactly why many women take contraception, to prevent painful periods, the likes of which no man would endure.)
I went to bed thinking at least that issue was resolved as far as America's presidential campaign goes. But then I woke up to the news that Mitt Romney has decided he misspoke when asked about his support of the Blunt amendment. This morning it appears that he is indeed for it, not against it. He is indeed going there.
Right into your bedroom, your medicine chest, your doctor's prescription pad. Right there in your bathroom where you keep your birth control is Mitt Romney's smiling face, asking for your vote while he vetoes your right to receive contraception if your doctor prescribes it for you. (You could still pay for it yourself, of course, as well as the doctor visit that resulted in the prescription and any complications that arise. Got thousands of dollars? No? Well, suffer those painful periods, ladies!)
I can handle a candidate who flipflops; I myself have realized I've misspoke or changed my mind, plenty of times. I can handle a candidate who has serious religious convictions; I too have serious ethical convictions.
But I'd never impose my religious or ethical beliefs on your exercise of your personal rights. This is why I believe it should be legal for you to shoot a wild animal but not your best friend. Because you should be allowed to exercise rights that I personally find offensive, as long as they don't deny someone else their equally sacred rights, such as the right to live. (Or my right to enjoy my own animals, if you want to get picky.)
And when it comes to my rights to consume FDA-approved medicine, the rights of my daughters to have potentially life-saving (and pain alleviating) contraceptive treatment, then Mitt Romney, or any elected politician, has no business telling my insurance company they can't pay for it. And any employer (who in my extended case, via marriage, happens to be the US federal government) also has no business refusing my need for contraception.
I think it's time for Mitt Romney to flip flop again, and get the hell out of my medicine cabinet.