> He also led the all-male congressional hearings against contraception.
The hearings weren't "against contraception". They were about whether the current status quo, where certain institutions aren't required to pay for contraception, can continue to do so.
Also, the panels weren't weren't all male - there were women on the second panel from Catholic schools supporting the "religious freedom" position.
And no, contraception isn't anywhere near $1000/year. Walmart charges $4/month while Target and CVS charge $9. Even at $20/month, we're looking at less than $250/year. (The required medical appointment is already covered so it doesn't need to be added.) IUDs and the like are less.
Condoms don't account for the difference. Yes, you can pay $1 each, but if you're going through $750/year, you should be buying multi-condom packages. Amazon charges $0.14-$0.30 for small packages.
Then again, the person claiming to spend $1000 is a lawyer-wanna-be, so maybe she's engaged in creative billing.
Condoms are almost completely irrelevant. A primary issue is women being prescribed contraceptives for medical conditions other than preventing pregnancy. Contraceptives like "the pill" contain powerful and varying hormone cocktails which have numerous uses. Different brands/types contain different cocktails at different doses, meaning that the situation is not as simple as "just get the cheap one". The particular one that works for that use is prescribed, which most certainly can be 1000USD/year.
>> "However, the "other conditions" case IS covered, and this wasn't about that."
>Depending on the organisation, it often times it is not.
Citation needed because the Catholic organizations in question DO cover the use of birth control drugs and procedures to address "other conditions".
There's even a papal statement to the effect that doing so is a good thing - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanae_Vitae , specifically the "Lawful Therapeutic Means" section.
The hearings weren't "against contraception". They were about whether the current status quo, where certain institutions aren't required to pay for contraception, can continue to do so.
Also, the panels weren't weren't all male - there were women on the second panel from Catholic schools supporting the "religious freedom" position.
And no, contraception isn't anywhere near $1000/year. Walmart charges $4/month while Target and CVS charge $9. Even at $20/month, we're looking at less than $250/year. (The required medical appointment is already covered so it doesn't need to be added.) IUDs and the like are less.
Condoms don't account for the difference. Yes, you can pay $1 each, but if you're going through $750/year, you should be buying multi-condom packages. Amazon charges $0.14-$0.30 for small packages.
Then again, the person claiming to spend $1000 is a lawyer-wanna-be, so maybe she's engaged in creative billing.