The Left, as they’re wont to do, is desperately trying to destroy the true meaning of the word “right.” They want to bastardize the idea of “rights” to mean anything that someone might want to have.
A “right” is something that cannot be taken away. The fact that they have to go through the courts to try to codify this garbage is indicative of this not being a “right” in any way. It can be taken away.
You are articulating the difference between rights and entitlements. Free speech is a right, healthcare, education and retirement fund would be entitlements, if they were funded by others and provided for free. (Whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing for the greater society is a separate question.) But it does appear that the left wants to cloud the issue between rights and entitlements.
On a separate note, having an entitlement of birth control is entirely meaningless without, first, an entitlement to sex. I demand universal access to cute, nubile females, provided for free. If, and only if, the birth control expenses exceed my ability to pay, then and only then should we start talking about any entitlements to birth control. But please: first things first!
Indeed - that’s what they’re wanting to do, get it accepted as axiomatic that the government is the grantor of rights,
and therefore can ungrant those rights when “necessary”.
The other part of this, the deeper part, is their visceral hatred of Christian morality. Whenever they encounter it, they attempt to destroy it.
Agree completely. No one has to pay in any way, shape, or form, for my rights as stated in the first 10 ammendments to the Constitution. They are part of “natural law”. By definition, if someone else has to give something up (like tax money) for me to have a “right”, then it isn’t one; it’s just a government-mandated tax.
Someone wants birth control pills? Go for it, just don’t make me pay for your list of “wants”.