The Thin Line

Go to MinnPost.com and click on Community Voices. Elizabeth has another article posted online.

Elizabeth writes about the thin line between being passionate about what we believe and imposing our beliefs on everyone. It is what she call "moral politics." After three not-so-separate issues created a political firestorm, (Minnesota's Marriage Amendment in which the Catholic Archdiocese is pouring money and lobbying for its passage, the inclusion of contraceptives in health insurance, and the Komen Foundation's issues with Planned Parenthood), she struggled for words and a way for her voice to be heard in the heated emotional climate. This article resulted. And it probably not the last word for her!

For a long time, we have complained in this country about voter apathy. People either just not caring - or believing their vote don't count. With these particular, issues the pendulum swung in the other direction. The emotional heat is so high, that it is hard to search for solutions that respect our diversity, when folks are shouting so loud they can't hear their neighbors' voices.

We don't live in a mostly Protestant white country, filled with immigrants from northern Europe. Actually, we never did - but many people believed that's who "we" are. Even if we were all still Protestant, as we were at the time of the Revolutionary War, Protestants represent very wide diversity of beliefs. Today, we are a rich multicultural country - religiously, culturally, sociologically, politically - the list goes on. Finding ways to be passionate, without imposition is no easy thing. But it is imperative!

When I was pregnant with my first child, our insurance did not pay a penny for my prenatal care or delivery. The reason - because pregnancy was not a disease and it affected only 50% of the population. Clem was in grad school, so we cashed in my government retirement benefits to pay for our medical costs. Our country has come a long way since that time!

There is a argument old as the hills called "since it doesn't affect me . . ." I don't have children in public schools, so why should I be assessed tax money for their education (first heard that one when I was a child). I don't use light rail, so why should I pay for it. Pregnancy (or breast or prostate cancer) aren't my issues . . . nor is treatment for sexually tranmitted diseases or higher health care costs for the elderly. The list goes on and on.

The fact is that our money, whether tax dollars or insurance fees, cover a wide range of services that I neither believe in nor use. The very basis of such assessments is that we rarely use much of what we assessed and we shoulder the costs among us. I shudder to think of what it would cost today to pay the medical costs for pregnancy. Moral politics. Or moral bankruptcy when we have lost track of the common good, especially when we don't agree with other people's life choices?