Sebelius Says Reducing Population Will Pay For Cost Of Contraception

I’m not sure about you, but I find it interesting that so many Democrat/liberal policies seem revolve around population reduction, particularly in the Black community

(CNS News) Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

She’s obviously kinda correct, but, it is a strange argument to make. The cost of contraception is miniscule (unless one is a law student at Georgetown, then it seems to be really expensive from having tons of sex daily). But, then, Sebelius’ boss thinks that children are a punishment, and his science czar is in favor of forced abortions and mass sterilizations. This goes hand in hand with such notions as Planned Parenthood, whose founder was a racist who believed in reducing the population of defectives and Blacks, and the eugenics craze propagated by liberals in the 20th Century which led to government mandated sterilizations, primarily of Blacks, often forced on them.

What, exactly, is the end game of the contraception mandate debate? Is this simply pandering to women, so they don’t have to pay any minor cost for their own birth control? Or, something deeper?

Sebelius, however, insisted that the mandate “upholds religious liberty.”

“The rule which we intend to promulgate in the near future around implementation will require insurance companies, not a religious employer, but the insurance company to provide coverage for contraceptives,” Sebelius told the subcommittee.

I’m not sure she understands what religious liberty is. Well, she does probably think it is something that comes from Big Government.

Despite the controversy over whether the mandate is constitutional, Sebelius told Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) during the hearing that the administration never sought a legal opinion about the regulation from the Department of Justice.

That part makes me wonder if Sebelius and HHS simply thought they were passing a simple rule, as Obamacare gave her the massive right to make whatever rules she wanted, and there was no intention to annoy Catholics and create a kerfuffle that moved the political discourse away from Obama’s massive failure on the economy as many have suggested. Instead, we are left with the option that she’s a complete moron, who never once considered “hey, does this violate that whole 1st Amendment religious thingy clause?”

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Also see...

Related Articles

2

The Newest Thrill Ride Named Porkulus

FacebookTwitterEmail Of course, this Washington Times story is less than shocking, but, hey, all you Democrat supporters might want to

17

Union Thug Whines That People Are Mistreating Union Thugs

FacebookTwitterEmail This one is hilarious. Union chief James P. Hoffa of the Teamsters has an op ed in the Detroit

0

Never Put The Bill of Rights on a Graduated Scale

FacebookTwitterEmail I’ve seen Facebook statuses from some of my liberal friends that go like this: First Amendment ≠ Second Amendment.

Share This

Share this post with your friends!