Apples and Oranges

I was reading the news this morning when I came upon a very interesting article on MSNBC about birth control. The article describes the debate over how birth control will be handled under the new health care bill.  Apparently there is the possibility that the new bill could grant free birth control to millions as a preventive medical measure.  Those in favor of birth control cite the overwhealming evidence in its favor.

"There is clear and incontrovertible evidence that family planning saves lives and improves health," said obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. David Grimes, an international family planning expert who teaches medicine at the University of North Carolina. "Contraception rivals immunization in dollars saved for every dollar invested. Spacing out children allows for optimal pregnancies and optimal child rearing. Contraception is a prototype of preventive medicine."

Unfrotunatley the article takes a strange turn after this.  The conversation is then turned over to...... The National Catholic Bioethics Center.... WTF?!

"We don't consider it to be health care, but a lifestyle choice," said John Haas, president of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, a Philadelphia think tank whose work reflects church teachings. "We think there are other ways to avoid having children than by ingesting chemicals paid for by health insurance."

I'm not quite sure what to say on this. Why is a religious organization talking about whether birth control is health care? The NCBC is not making an ethical statement. They are making a statement about a fact (the fact of whether or not birth control is health care.) The NCBC makes a nice effort to cloak their factual and obviously false claim about birth control/health care with a hint of moral superiority but these are still two separate issues. For some reason we are constantly mixing apples and oranges whenever we debate very serious issues like this. We need to lean to separate issues of simple fact from some of the more slippery wrangling we do over the more subjective moral questions...... And why don't we ever see any balance on the ethics questions posed?  In my opinion the church is the last place I would go for both factual and moral guidance. 

And shouldn't the PR firm representing the Vatican advise against any kind of involvement in talking about kids for at least a while?  I guess a religion that has actively supported child rape for decades and decades and decades would have to take a step backwards if there were less unattended children for them to prey on.