In a Public Forum letter ("Avoid 'Dirty 100' ... ," June 7), Beth Backman castigated employers who, based on religious objection, have resorted to legal action in an attempt to obtain exemption from providing medical insurance that covers contraceptive coverage. These employers, she writes, "have decided that their personal beliefs are more important than the rights of their employees."
Excuse me, but I don't see that the lawsuits are aimed at restricting women's use of contraceptives, which is their right. They appear to be aimed at removing the requirement that employers sign up and pay for all or part of the contraceptive insurance coverage, against their religious convictions that contraception is not moral. So Ms. Backman seems to be saying that having an employer provide and pay for a fringe benefit that provides contraceptive coverage is a "right." Perhaps she and her NOW compatriots should be lobbying employers who want exemptions from the contraceptive mandate in Obamacare to reduce their female employees' contribution to health insurance premiums by an amount sufficient to cover a woman's purchase of contraceptive insurance coverage or contraceptives on her own so she can exercise what is her real right to use or not use such measures.
D. James Croft