Should Your Boss Control Your Access To Medical Care?
In a radical response to President Obama’s desire to make birth control readily available to any woman who wants it, Republican Senator Roy Blunt has proposed letting any employer deny coverage for any health care treatment to which they claim a religious or moral objection. Not just a well-documented religious objection, such as birth control for Catholic women, but a MORAL objection. This means your boss could impose his morals on your access to health care.
Your employer could choose to deny coverage for contraception, HIV treatment, vaccination, substance-abuse/alcohol counseling, blood transfusions, prenatal care for unmarried woman, or even mental illness. Is this the answer to our problems? Let our bosses decide what medical treatment we should have access to?
Eye On Modesto 
Employers already have some control over the employees health care especially if they’re paying for it such as disability,workers compensation and Health insurance.
Or maybe the United States should implement universal, tax payer funded healthcare so an individual doesn’t have to carry multiple insurance policies in an effort to contend with all the various, arbitrary exclusions of private, for-profit corporations?
If the United States is to eventually move to “universal” or “single payer” healthcare, since abortion is safe and legal the procedure will have to be covered by tax-payer-financed healthcare. Such a system would bypass “moral” objections by employer-subsidized health insurance plans.
I don’t think tax payers should foot the bill for killing children in Afghanistan, or take up the slack for religious institutions who for some arbitrary reason do not pay taxes, but as a society we ideally reach some state of compromise and consensus…