The Obama Administration’s recently announced policy to require insurers to cover contraception as women’s preventive health care has
prompted many over-heated op-eds, editorials on both sides
and even a thoroughly one-sided Congressional hearing.
The controversy is unlikely to end anytime soon: pending federal legislation and proposed amendments would
massively enlarge the scope of insurers’ and business owners’ ability to restrict any type of insurance benefit on either
“moral” or “religious” grounds, undermining the very purpose of insurance.
Below, we take a closer look at the arguments by opponents of the contraception requirement, unpack the legal issues and public health debate, and
respond to many erroneous assertions.