The Catholic Church, HHS, Contraception, and you...

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This was the discussion on Morning Joe on Monday. The big hubbub is over the HHS' decision to implement the contraception coverage rules, in the Affordable Care Act.

There has been much said about it over the last 48 hours, about how it is an infringement upon freedom of religion and the like. Now I will confess, I am not Catholic, nor am I particularly religious, so prepared to accept that I am not as sensitive to this issue as some may be. I am however, very concerned about how women's health issues are treated and talked about.

To me, this more an issue of equal treatment under the law then about religious expression.

In my opinion, if the Church wishes to act as a large employer or insurer, then it has to meet the public policy requirements of those industries. Many will say this is a difficult issue, but it is not really. Women's health issues are not a separable thing, they are health care issues. If you provide health insurance to employees then contraception is part of health care. You do not have to approve of how people use that good, but the good offered needs to be uniform and non-discriminatory.

The best defense of this line of thought I have read, was in a letter to the Daily Dish:

Critics frame the issue as forcing the church to violate its theological stance on contraception. I have never seen this theological claim carefully defended. Yes, Catholics believe that individuals commit sin when those individuals use contraception. However, it has never been the theological position of the church that individuals and organizations have a moral requirement to coerce others to not use contraception. A good Catholic business owner who buys insurance for his workers is not expected to confess as a sin the fact that this insurance covers contraception. He is expected to confess if he or she uses contraception.

What of the convictions of those non-religious/catholic students/employees? That always seems lost in this discussion. I am sure many would say that they can just go to a different school, get a different job. But is that realistic? More to the point if those organizations truly feel their convictions are being challenged they can choose not to accept federal funds. All this is premised on the idea that if you wish to accept tax payer funds you must treat those taxpayers equally.

Some more:

The new policy does not encourage individuals to use contraception against their will. Indeed, these religious organizations are still free to make the moral case to their employees that using contraception is wrong. I see no place in Catholic theology that supports the notion that the employer who pays for insurance that covers contraception is immoral.

If a church employee pays for pornography with wages paid to him by the church, do we say that the church is to blame or that the church paid for the pornography? No. If a person gets drunk on beer brewed by monks, are the monks committing the sin of debauchery by proxy? No. Is the Lord God Himself morally at fault for all anal sex because he induced men into this behavior by putting pleasurable nerve endings in the prostate? No.

I know that there are many people who are concerned that this is some sort of attack on their religious liberty. I disagree. But I acknowledge it is very much a concern. However, this is not a matter of religious liberty, but one of public health.

We can continue the strum und drang or we can stop separating out women's health issues from public health issues.

-Cheers.