Its always curious to watch the champions of choice decide what choices to champion and what choices to dismiss for the common good.
If you believe that the Obama administrations decision to force Catholic institutions to pay for and offer (directly or indirectly) products the church finds morally objectionable is an assault on religious freedom and free speech you probably also realize the importance of consumer choice. After all when government dictates what people buy and sell it dictates much more.
First lets ponder the precedent: Obama argues that government not only is empowered to force every adult to purchase a product in a marketplace (in this case health insurance) but also can demand that providers sell certain products in this market (in this case contraception). Washington then has the ability to direct both seller and buyer if it deems such actions beneficial for society.
And needless to say when Democrats deem something beneficial for society they have a strong tendency to start treating this something as if it were a right. As it stands you have the right to a free condom and should you forget or neglect or utilize this right you have the right to an abortion that is partially funded by fungible taxpayer dollars. (If however a couple keep a child they have no right to use their tax dollars to shop for a school outside their own neighborhood or apparently find a health care plan that comports with their values.)
As many of you know there are negative rights as in my right to be protected from harm if I try to buy say birth control. And there are also positive rights as in my right to have birth control provided for me. In the eyes of many liberals condoms health care salubrious foods housing etc. should if there is any decency in this nation be positive rights. Thus anyone failing to provide these things is really just denying people access.
So the argument goes by failing to offer birth control the Catholic Church is actually preventing access to reproductive health care.
A neat trick.
If we need an example of how limiting consumer choice can ignite social economic and quality issues we can turn to the similar one-size-fits-all debacle of rights called public education. Yes there are Philistines like me who believe that exposing schools to market forces would spur innovation and better outcomes. Surely there is little doubt that if we extricated schools from state monopolies and transformed parents into consumers the many arguments about God history politics and Darwinism -- or whateverism is grating against your sensibilities -- would be fought in the comment sections of websites rather than in classrooms.
Dont get me wrong; the left believes that parents should be free to teach their kids whatever theyd like just not in the schools they happen to pay for.
Health care is similarly destined no doubt. The intent of Democrats is to create a system with uniform coverage. So what we will be left with is a bunch of highly regulated interchangeable insurance companies offering virtually identical plans with no incentive for innovation and absolutely no reason to tailor products or plans to appeal to the many diverse groups in this country -- religious or otherwise.
They have one consumer to please and one set of morals to worry about. The state. If you dont like your plan switch to another one just like it. If you cant afford to leave your employers plan then join one of those fabricated exchanges run by government.
If youve got some religious beef beg for an accommodation.
If you dont like the answer well hey where you gonna go?
Its like a theocracy ... without the God part.
David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.
Its always curious to watch the champions of choice decide what choices to champion and what choices to dismiss for the common good.
If you believe that the Obama administrations decision to force Catholic institutions to pay for and offer (directly or indirectly) products the church finds morally objectionable is an assault on religious freedom and free speech you probably also realize the importance of consumer choice. After all when government dictates what people buy and sell it dictates much more.
First lets ponder the precedent: Obama argues that government not only is empowered to force every adult to purchase a product in a marketplace (in this case health insurance) but also can demand that providers sell certain products in this market (in this case contraception). Washington then has the ability to direct both seller and buyer if it deems such actions beneficial for society.
And needless to say when Democrats deem something beneficial for society they have a strong tendency to start treating this something as if it were a right. As it stands you have the right to a free condom and should you forget or neglect or utilize this right you have the right to an abortion that is partially funded by fungible taxpayer dollars. (If however a couple keep a child they have no right to use their tax dollars to shop for a school outside their own neighborhood or apparently find a health care plan that comports with their values.)
As many of you know there are negative rights as in my right to be protected from harm if I try to buy say birth control. And there are also positive rights as in my right to have birth control provided for me. In the eyes of many liberals condoms health care salubrious foods housing etc. should if there is any decency in this nation be positive rights. Thus anyone failing to provide these things is really just denying people access.
So the argument goes by failing to offer birth control the Catholic Church is actually preventing access to reproductive health care.
A neat trick.
If we need an example of how limiting consumer choice can ignite social economic and quality issues we can turn to the similar one-size-fits-all debacle of rights called public education. Yes there are Philistines like me who believe that exposing schools to market forces would spur innovation and better outcomes. Surely there is little doubt that if we extricated schools from state monopolies and transformed parents into consumers the many arguments about God history politics and Darwinism -- or whateverism is grating against your sensibilities -- would be fought in the comment sections of websites rather than in classrooms.
Dont get me wrong; the left believes that parents should be free to teach their kids whatever theyd like just not in the schools they happen to pay for.
Health care is similarly destined no doubt. The intent of Democrats is to create a system with uniform coverage. So what we will be left with is a bunch of highly regulated interchangeable insurance companies offering virtually identical plans with no incentive for innovation and absolutely no reason to tailor products or plans to appeal to the many diverse groups in this country -- religious or otherwise.
They have one consumer to please and one set of morals to worry about. The state. If you dont like your plan switch to another one just like it. If you cant afford to leave your employers plan then join one of those fabricated exchanges run by government.
If youve got some religious beef beg for an accommodation.
If you dont like the answer well hey where you gonna go?
Its like a theocracy ... without the God part.
David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.
