Today’s 20 second conversation on the election and contraception

I was involved  in the following exchange concerning health care and birth control as it related to the election results last night. The “dialogue” is paraphrased. Maybe this can be part of the new approach for conservatives?

Actress 1: … The big problem for Republicans is that they refuse to cover birth control. I’m not sure what the big deal is.

Actor: I don’t mean to interrupt, but are you referring to Catholic business owners who do not want to provide a birth control benefit in their health insurance policies for employees?

Actress 2: Yeah, that’s pretty stupid. Women should have access to health care.

Actor: OK, I’m not sure how that relates to Republicans “refusing to cover birth control” … but how are Catholic business owners restricting or cutting off health care for women?

[a slight pause]

Actor: Let me ask you both a question. How would you feel if some of your tax dollars were redirected to me so I could use that money towards a Catholic education for my kids?

Actress 1: That would totally be a violation of the “Separation of Church and State.”

Actor: Do Catholics have the right to not use or support the use of contraception? Is that a valid belief?

Actress 2: Yes, but I’m pro-choice and I think women have the right to choose.

Actor: How do you justify using tax dollars or mandating health care premiums that take money from the pocket of Catholic business owners to pay for contraception, and then quote the “Separation of Church and State” when it comes to me using your tax dollars to pay for a Catholic education?

[dead silence]

A nerve was hit during the above conversation. One actress actually walked away during the last sentence of the paraphrased transcript above, but one really did understand the point. Women may certainly have the right to choose, but they can’t be going around demanding others pay for their choice.

Remember … Human rights exist simultaneously between people. A “right” can not be defined as one that diminishes the rights of another.

I’ll admit, the entire conversation was short and none of the participants were prepared. I think many people are afraid to have these conversations with people they know have an opposite opinion. It’s amazing how we quickly open up and commiserate with those we agree with.

I’ll freely admit most of the people who read my articles are already conservatives. I bet I’ve changed the minds of a few, but most of the time I’m preaching to the choir. When writing earlier today, I thought of mentioning a “different approach” that would take us all out of our comfort zone during conversations. Maybe this is the way to go?

15 replies
  1. gillie28
    gillie28 says:

    Steve, what a great dialog!? Part of the problem is that those who do have a decent, moral compass just don’t speak out directly for what is right (no political intent with that word).? We’ve just become pushovers.? Your conversation exactly illustrates the point:??liberals advocate?tolerance, as long as it conforms to their politically correct views.? God help you if you disagree.?

  2. JBS
    JBS says:

    I am surprised that you got your argument stated. Somehow, there is a perception that allowing Catholic groups to opt out of providing contraception coverage is the same as advocating “barefoot and pregnant.” Catholics get labeled as? sexist and homophobes. Not true, of course. Somehow, the Democrats suckered many people, most notably women, into believing Republicans are against contraception and thus are anti-woman.?
    Like many Democrat arguments, there is a disconnect in their logic. Yet, they seem to make the leap and plant a fallacy into the minds of many voters. That Catholics advocate morality is mutated into the false flag of Republicans being against equality and women’s rights. ?????
    The Democrats have latched onto a very powerful canard and have only to step back and let the opposition twist and flail. It is the classic manipulation of a straw man argument.

  3. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    So we can have “vouchers” for birth control, but not vouchers for a child’s education.
    The rights of your contraceptive purchases stop at the edge of my unopened wallet.
    Let me guess: the one that walked away was the pro “choice” one, right?? I would like to have asked her how she would like it if she had to pay twice for her choices, just as people that pay for parochial schools AND public school taxes are obligated to do.
    This is an ode to the low information (Democrat) voter….

  4. Common Man
    Common Man says:

    I think being able to feed my family is a fundamental “right”. So when are the liberals going to buy my groceries. PS I like steaks & lobsters like Michelle Obama.

  5. dennis
    dennis says:

    This is precisely why the democrats won this election. They made us all lose focus on what was the real issue. Unemployment, Jobs and the runaway spending in Congress. We even made a hurricane political. They used Alinsky to perfection with the help of the MSM and the Republicans. Take your eyes off the ball and you will not hit it.

  6. Don Lombardo
    Don Lombardo says:

    War on women? How about the war on the baby boomer generation. Obamacare is nothing more than genocide on everyone over 60. Why – because this solves the Social Security problem.?Just kill the problem off, and?Social Security magically become solvent.?Marxism at its best.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Kills (pun intended) two birds with one stone: the older generation that votes Republican will be allowed to expire.? Or pushed….

    • JBS
      JBS says:

      Single-payer system, single-party rule.
      Nice symmetry.
      Marginalizes and then negates the boomers.
      The Dems will think they have the problem (us) solved . . .

Comments are closed.