Last month Attorney General Mike DeWine signed a letter urging the Obama Administration to allow employers to opt out of paying for contraceptive coverage, a move that would effectively restrict access to contraception for women in Ohio . It was one more on a growing list of occasions DeWine has used his public office to push his own religious agenda.
David Pepper called DeWine’s position “a dramatic step backward for women’s health and autonomy” that “shows utter disregard for the rights of women to make their own health decisions.”
Our own Leonidas questioned the legal logic behind the letter calling it “not well thought out and dangerous.”
Records obtained from the AG’s office show that a few people wrote to DeWine to support his decision, but most had ever harsher words for the Attorney General…
The last thing that the people of Ohio need is an Atty Gen. that brings his religion into his political office.
This Political Hack, Mike DeWine needs to do the work of the citizens of Ohio and not his personal religion and the Republican party.
The constituent is calling in regards to the article about “DeWine wants private employer exemption.”
She believes that church and state should be still be separate in regards to the laws. She believes a catholic university should have the option to not offer insurance for birth control; however, if they offer an insurance policy and its covered then employees should be able to receive it. The constituent believes they should not be granted an exemption.
Mr. DeWine, please stop it. Stop trying to deny Ohio women the right to insurance coverage for contractptives. This coverage does not violate the religious beliefs of employers who don’t believe in contraception. Those employers don’t need to use it if they choose not to. But it should be covered by the insurance policies of women who do choose to use it. Moreover, in many cases, it is not a choice but a necessity. Birth control pills are frequently provided for medical reasons. Second moreover — contraception is not abortion. You are smarter than that. Don’t pander to extremists.
If you are going to insist on continuing the fight against contraception, I must insist that you also fight for the right to deny coverage for impotence and erectile disfunction. If God had wanted these men to reproduce (and after all, isn’t sex exclusively for reproduction), he would give them good, potent boners. An old geeser who has no intention to reproduce has no business trying to get it on with his trophy wife or mistress. That goes against my religion. So does relegating women to one role in life, that of baby-makers.
I write this as church-going Presbyterian, by the way.
While I admire you as a person, I must take issue with your recent letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius asking that an exemption to providing birth control services be extended to any employer whose sensibilities are offended by the Affordable Care Act. There are many reasons to use birth control and not all of them have to do with reproduction. I don’t want to have to explain to anyone other than my doctor why I would want contraception or why I would want it for my disabled adult daughter. No woman should have to pay out-of-pocket for this health care, no matter whose employer provides health insurance. If you want to make a difference, separate health insurance from employment altogether. Everyone deserves good health care, not just those with elite employment. And women deserve control over their own bodies. Employers should have NOTHING to say about these matters.
I am concerned that you believe the morning after pill is an abortificant. Studies show that it works by DELAYING contraception. Also, I do not understand the Republican party trying to limit women’s access to birth control. Apparently men getting Viagra is well funded and covered But women who need contraception have to fight for their right to get it through insurance.
It is disturbing to me that you feel that THIS is an issue to fight over, as opposed to, say, getting more jobs for Ohioans. (I’m unemployed so that is a concern.)
I would like all of you Republican politicians to STOP trying to legislate women’s reproductive rights. By the way, I am past the point of needing contraception etc. However, where contraception exists at low prices, abortions fall. For some reason all of you Republicans want to take away rights from women. Shame on you!
Dear Attorney General DeWine:
I read your quote in the Columbus Dispatch – “They’re being forced to provide insurance coverage that violates their religious beliefs,” DeWine said.
The article says that you wrote to Kathleen Sebelius urging that private employers be permitted to refuse coverage based on religious beliefs.
If this is permitted, what’s to stop every employer from saying that they are Christ Scientists who don’t believe in medical interventions?
Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter.
Stop focusing on preventing women from having birth control.
My concern is your letter to Kathleen Sebalius asking for exemption for employers who have a religious objection to birth control. You said that it was a violation of their religious freedom, but what about my freedom to have access to a LEGAL drug? If an employer can says they will not provide birth control, can they also say that they will not provide treatment for any other medication they find objectionable? Do you feel that you are speaking for the majority of Ohioans?
I would like an explanation about how providing birth control reduces someones religious freedom? And an apology for the incorrect assumption that the morning after pill is an abortifacient when it is not.
I read in today’s Dayton Daily News that you are joining other AG’s to protest the requirement that all employers provide all options for legal medical care to all employees. You are supporting an exception based on religious beliefs. I assume this is in response to the Catholic Church and their stand on no birth control or abortions.
Where would this stop?
Some religions do not believe in ANY doctor care or medicines. Do you exempt them from any health care coverage? All employees of any organization should have health care options with all LEGAL coverages. Your position seems a bit slanted to one religious belief, and would open up many more exceptions based on other religious beliefs. Please do not support these efforts which are just an attempt to to water down full health care options for all of us, regardless of our religious beliefs.
Thank you for all your other great efforts to make our state safe. Remember, we separated church and state in this country for a reason.