Until I read Rich Lowry's column in the Oregonian today, I didn't realize how wacko the religiousy libertarian wing of the Republican Party had become.
Following Lowry's logic about why Catholics with a moral distaste for contraception shouldn't have to comply with health insurance laws that apply to everybody else, apparently anybody with a moral objection to any law should be able to ignore it.
About a month ago, people who thought religious institutions shouldn’t be forced to pay for things they morally oppose were unremarkable, boring even. Now, they are waging a heinous War on Women.
Through the twisted logic of statism run amok, opposition to a new Health and Human Services mandate forcing employers to buy insurance covering contraceptives becomes opposition to access to contraceptives altogether.
...The Catholic bishops are merely fighting to keep institutions affiliated with their church from getting coerced into participating in what they consider a moral wrong.
Morality comes in many forms. Religious believers have a moral code. So do secular nonbelievers. Thus I assume Lowry wants government to stop coercing anyone "into participating in what they consider to be a moral wrong."
OK. Let's see how that'll work out.
Surely there are lots of alcoholics who love to both drink and drive. They don't feel like they're doing anything wrong. Their moral code says "Have a good time at a bar. Then get in your car. No problem." Why should drunk drivers not be able to do whatever they want, free of government interference, just like he wants to allow Catholics?
Here's a less extreme example: people who have a moral objection to financing unnecessary wars. Or even wars in general. Lowry seemingly wants every citizen who objects to the Department of Defense to subtract from their tax bill the percentage of the federal budget that goes to the military.
After all, nobody should have to participate in what they feel is a moral wrong. And no reasons need be given for a moral stand. Religions don't have demonstrable, factual, reasonable reasons for their "thou shalt's."
Blind faith and I believe suffice for religions. So why not for everybody else?
If you think it'd be ridiculously unworkable if people could decide what laws they wanted to comply with (I sure do), then the absurdity of allowing religious organizations to be exempt from the Affordable Care Act's health insurance coverage rules should be apparent.
But if Lowry and the Republicans get their way, I'll be founding my Church of Unlimited Speeding, Alcohol Consumption, and Pacificism.
Our sacred sacrament will be racing around superfast on the highways, drunk on whatever type of alcoholic beverage members of the congregation prefer, which has been paid for by all the money saved by deducting from our taxes the 20% or so of the federal budget that goes to defense and security.