Lately it seems politicians are far more concerned with issues I categorize as peripheral, because they have neither the spine nor the incentive to tackle real issues. Some lobbyists enable this floundering while others are there to make a difference. It is too bad the politics of this country have come to this unfortunate standstill.

Many Catholic and Baptist religious affiliated organizations are self insured. Consequently, this mandate forces the Church to pay for abortion.

To start with, the use of male condoms as a sole contraception method may not be right for some couples. Many couples choose to use multiple birth control methods in order to increase effectiveness. This option is particularly important for those who may have religious or personal objections to abortion. Furthermore, even couples using only one method may wish to choose a method that is more effective than the male condom. Each year, around 15-24 of every 100 couples relying exclusively on male condoms will experience an unintended pregnancy, according to Planned Parenthood. Meanwhile, fewer 2-9 in 100 couples using oral contraceptives and fewer than 1 in 100 couples using the intrauterine device (IUD) experience an unintended pregnancy. (See http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/birth-control-effectiveness-chart-22710.htm) The IUD is one of the most effective and cheapest forms of contraception over the long term, but currently relatively few people use it, largely because of its high up-front cost. Despite the fact that media attention has focused almost exclusively on oral contraception, the Department of Health & Human Service’s guidelines for what will qualify as preventive care actually include all “FDA-approved contraception methods and contraceptive counseling.”

An even more important point is that the male condom is, in fact, not a viable contraceptive method for all women. Women in situations of domestic violence often need a form of contraception that is fully under their control. For these women, especially, the rule providing contraception without out-of-pocket costs will be highly beneficial, since they may not otherwise be able to afford the contraception they need. Sadly, pregnancy coercion in abusive relationships is a real and serious problem (see http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/domestic-abuse-abusive-men-sabotage-birth-control/story?id=9639340#.TzlAqlE5KSo). So-called “invisible” forms of contraception–the ones the Affordable Care Act will increase access to–are key to combating this problem.

I can’t offer a concrete answer to the question of how best to balance religious rights with the provision of healthcare in this case. But there is one answer that is clearly wrong, and that is discounting the importance of prescription contraceptives.