We are all sluts now

I can’t believe that so much is being missed in the debate over “contraception” or “religious objections to contraception,” or even “sluttiness.”

People are so into not getting it that it’s pathetic.

While I touched on this in an earlier post, today I saw a link at Greg Mankiw’s blog to an article by John Cochrane that nails down the real issue. It’s not contraception, nor is it religious objections to contraception. It’s the tyranny of having the government say what health insurance must cover.

The critics fell for a trap. By focusing on an exemption for church-related institutions, critics effectively admitthat it is right for the rest of us to be subjected to this sort of mandate. They accept the horribly misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and they resign themselves to chipping away at its edges. No, we shouldthrow it out, and fix the terrible distortions in the health-insurance and health-care markets.

Sure, churches should be exempt. We should all be exempt.

Why do I have to have a “religious conscience” in order to not want to be forced by the government to share in the incidental cost of what other people do with their genitals or the cost of anything else? Why is it that only “religious” people are said to have the consciences to object? This is not about sex, and I wish people would stop spinning it as if it is. To not want to be forced by the government to share the cost of such incidentals as contraceptives is not to be “against sex” one way or the other, any more than not wanting to share the cost of dental care or prescription glasses constitutes being against teeth or against eyes. If the government wanted to force people to share the cost of other people’s veterinary care, would opposing that mean being against dogs and cats?

As I said before, the problem is Obamacare. Allowing it to be turned into an argument over religious principles or over sex does more than miss the point. It tacitly acknowledges and acquiesces to the idea that government does have the right to dictate terms to insurers and make us share the costs of things we might not want to pay for.

By arguing for exceptions, we not only divide ourselves, we agree to the theory of the plan.  Like the apocryphal slut in the story attributed to George Bernard Shaw, we are merely haggling over the price.

MORE: Here is a puzzling statistic:

(Reuters) – Nearly two-thirds of Americans favor President Barack Obama’s policy requiring birth control coverage for female employees, including clear majorities of Roman Catholic, Protestant evangelical and independent voters, a poll showed on Thursday.

Can that be accurate? Because, if we consider that a majority of Americans are against Obamacare (72% is the latest figure), then what are the implications? That a majority is also for it? How can such illogic be?

If socialism is successfully conflated into a debate over contraception and people are duped into supporting what they actually oppose, then they’re dumber than I realized, and they’re liable to believe anything. Like the idea that the Democrats are “for” contraception, and the Republicans are “against” it.

If the voters are in fact that stupid, may God have pity on us in November.