![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
The current law states that birth control is covered under health insurance plans for women in Arizona for contraceptive purposes as well as health concerns. However, the new birth control bill, House Bill 2625, states that women who want their birth control pill to be covered by their insurance plans must verify its purpose to be solely for medical reasons and not to prevent pregnancy. The bill would grant employers to deny female employees the right to be covered based on religious beliefs.
The new bill was passed by Arizona's House of Representatives in early March and was endorsed by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday with a 6-2 vote. According to Arizona House Bill 2625, employers can refuse coverage for birth control for contraceptive, abortifacient, abortion or sterilization purposes, forcing women to submit a claim to prove medical conditions which require treatment for birth control.
"Government should not be telling the organizations or mom-and-pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs," Republican Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, who sponsors the bill, told the State Press. "I believe we live in America. We don't live in the Soviet Union."
Oh, and the goverment should be passing bills that make it legal for employers to invade in on their employee's personal health to make sure they're using birth control for medical reasons rather than something that violate's their religious beliefs? Let alone, firing them because they're using something that violates their personal religious beliefs?
At least in the Soviet Union, they made birth control easily accessible to grant gender equality so that everyone can control their reproductive freedom. Imagine that
"My whole legislation is about our First Amendment rights and freedom of religion," Lesko told the State Press. "All my bill does is that an employer can opt out of the mandate if they have any religious objections."
No, it's not. It would be one thing if the federal goverment made employers also use contraception if they're against it, but all they are doing is making sure employers provide it because their employees shouldn't be denied access to converage just because their employer is against it on religious grounds...especially if the employee and employer have different religious beliefs. And it's a violation of the first amendment because that person's religious beliefs may think using birth control is okay. So, who's religious beliefs would be right? Especially since there is no established religion?
The new bill was passed by Arizona's House of Representatives in early March and was endorsed by the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday with a 6-2 vote. According to Arizona House Bill 2625, employers can refuse coverage for birth control for contraceptive, abortifacient, abortion or sterilization purposes, forcing women to submit a claim to prove medical conditions which require treatment for birth control.
"Government should not be telling the organizations or mom-and-pop employers to do something against their moral beliefs," Republican Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, who sponsors the bill, told the State Press. "I believe we live in America. We don't live in the Soviet Union."
Oh, and the goverment should be passing bills that make it legal for employers to invade in on their employee's personal health to make sure they're using birth control for medical reasons rather than something that violate's their religious beliefs? Let alone, firing them because they're using something that violates their personal religious beliefs?
At least in the Soviet Union, they made birth control easily accessible to grant gender equality so that everyone can control their reproductive freedom. Imagine that
"My whole legislation is about our First Amendment rights and freedom of religion," Lesko told the State Press. "All my bill does is that an employer can opt out of the mandate if they have any religious objections."
No, it's not. It would be one thing if the federal goverment made employers also use contraception if they're against it, but all they are doing is making sure employers provide it because their employees shouldn't be denied access to converage just because their employer is against it on religious grounds...especially if the employee and employer have different religious beliefs. And it's a violation of the first amendment because that person's religious beliefs may think using birth control is okay. So, who's religious beliefs would be right? Especially since there is no established religion?