Contraception, Fornication, and an Idiot Economist

Fornication rates for unmarried respondents 45 and under in the GSS by Religion

Some idiot economist at Rochester apparently hates contraception, women, and is too stupid to understand how insurance works. First, given our new national obsession with eliminating insurance coverage for contraception in preparation for making contraception illegal, we might want to consider how many Americans actually support the criminalization of contraception and how many Americans currently rely on contraception for the prevention of marital and nonmarital fertility. Second, we might want to think about something our idiot economist doesn’t understand, but our President does, regarding why it is completely stupid to even think that an insurance company would NOT cover contraception.

First, the vast majority of Americans of child-bearing risk use some form of contraception, and oral contraceptives are preferred by many. MARRIED people who don’t want any more kids or don’t want to conceive at a given time use contraception, and 41% of GSS respondents under the age of 50 are married—so a large plurality of demand for contraception comes from non-fornicators. Above, you can see rates of fornication among never married respondents by religious group. I supposed I could have thrown in the divorced and widowed, since they’re not supposed to have sex either, according to a gaggle of child molesters, Rick Santorum,  the Institute for American Values, and the National Marriage Project.  But, these are the hard core fornicators, who are evil because they are not married and have sex. Indeed, three fourths of unmarried Americans reported having had sex in the last year, contrary to the will of Jesus. Even 41% of  unmarried Mormons at risk for conception dropped their magic underwear and did it (63% of the unmarried who grew up Mormon managed to get laid).  Jews were the luckiest/most evil with 88% managing at least one bang in the last year.  And look, those liberal Protestants aren’t even fornicating as much as sectarians! And Baptists are the third most promiscuous group! Those awful sluts! Congratulations to the Catholics, who manage to be above average in their rates of fornication. So, virtually everyone of childbearing age needs contraception unless they want to conceive a child.

So, why is this even a controversy? The reason for Title X is the reality that poor people need contraception, and it’s good social policy to provide it. Unwanted children create a burden on families, communities, and the state—so enabling people to control their fertility is a benefit for everyone.  Landsburg’s taxes are LOWER because Title X reduces unwanted fertility among the poor. Of course, libertarian asshats like Landsburg would solve the problem by not helping families, and eliminating communities and the state. I wonder what his insurance is? He doesn’t seem to understand the difference between Title X and insurance, since Rush wasn’t insulting someone advocating for Title X. Insurance is what was being discussed regarding the for-profit Catholic hospitals and fundamentalist schools (non-profit my ass)  being required to hold policies for their employees and students. Remember how that tricky President of ours made the “compromise” that wasn’t really? Why did that work? Well, gee, you think maybe the insurance industry has a stake in making sure that all policyholders at risk for conception receive contraceptives? For that measly monthly outlay the insurance company won’t have to pay for prenatal care, fancy ultrasounds,  hospitalization, anesthetic, maybe surgery, or all manner of other expenses which accrue in a pregnancy. And, then they’d have another policy-holder who is costly for the first several years. Dipshit Economist doesn’t pay for a woman’s contraception; Dipshit pays LESS because well-contracepted women cost the insurance company less.  I’d like to see a panel of insurance industry actuaries set us straight on this. Sure, they would have loved Blunt (which is why their toadies in the Republican party voted for it in lockstep), which could have enabled them to deny coverage for all manner of things, but without the power to deny coverage to single parents, gays and lesbians, and whomever else they think morally unworthy for coverage (even though they pay their premiums….) any real actuary will tell you that contraception coverage is sound insurance policy.


3 Responses to “Contraception, Fornication, and an Idiot Economist”

  1. James Sweet Says:

    As I was saying to my wife the other day, those who oppose insurance coverage for contraception are wrong on every level: They are wrong on a moral level, they are wrong on a pragmatic level, and in trying to falsely label this a free exercise issue, they are wrong on a constitutional level. They are wrong in every possible way they could be wrong.

  2. sherkat Says:

    I’d like to see people push this to the limit in all directions. This isn’t about free exercise nor is name-calling the issue. I worry that people are more outraged about a fat pedophile calling a straight edged Catholic law student a slut than they are about this assault on public health. This is about contraception! I wish NOW and Planned Parenthood and others would corner the insurance bastards and make them lay it down straight, and while they’re at it, they could get OMB to give projections of the negative impact of losing Title X on the Medicaid budget. You wanna kill Planned Parenthood? Really?! Abortion really is fairly rare, because of Title X, you eliminate that and you’ll get more abortion and more unwanted pregnancies, both of which are much more costly than some overpriced pills. Obama gave the insurance lobby a free ride. He’s taking all the flack for this, when it was what they wanted all along.

  3. schmielt Says:

    It’s working…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: