April 22, 2013 by Alex Johannigman
Eden Foods has joined the fight against the unconstitutional HHS Mandate with their own lawsuit, and is receiving different kinds of attacks than what I’ve seen in the past directed at other likeminded employers. When I first read the story, my thought was “Oh, that makes sense. A company that produces organic food and avoids adding harmful chemicals to their food and the environment is also opposed to women doing the same thing to their bodies.” But apparently some see this as a huge disconnect. Apparently being organic and caring about the environment in one situation is considered really liberal, but in another situation it’s “quietly harboring a right-wing, ideological agenda.” I’ll admit that birth control is much more than an environmental issue, but when it comes to the “liberal clientele” that care enough about the environment to pay for more expensive organic foods that make them healthier and help the environment, it confuses me that they’re also willing to pay more money to do the exact opposite.
I’ve never completely understood what makes a certain viewpoint “conservative” or “liberal.” Some viewpoints make sense when they tend to follow the general paradigm of how conservatives tend to want less government interference and liberals want more. But then that sort of falls apart on a number of issues. Issues like abortion where the conservatives want restrictions and the liberals don’t. Similarly, liberals talk about how important it is for everyone to have the “right to choose” when it comes to abortion, but not to when it is related to gun ownership or how a company runs their business (such as fast food companies in San Francisco or the HHS mandate). Or how both the Republicans and Democrats support having a massive and very expensive military that plays policeman of the world, but both talk about how they want to solve the debt crisis. And then there are issues like the controversy around Eden foods, where liberals claim to be the ones who love the environment, but not when it comes to birth control.
When I think about the pro-life cause, in my mind it has to do with always defending human life because it is sacred and valuable in itself. But my understanding of what it means to be pro-life is clearly divided when you look at political parties. Republicans say they are pro-life, unless the person is guilty, in which case they deserve the death penalty. Although they wouldn’t use the term, Democrats are actually pro-life at times, unless the life isn’t viable like in the case of abortion or, to a lesser extent (in support), euthanasia.
I hope that the “liberal clientele” who are protesting Eden’s stance against the HHS mandate take a moment to think about how inconsistent they are being with their own worldviews. And not just them, but also pro-choicers who want to ban unhealthy foods, pro-lifers who support the death penalty, and anyone else who finds themself saying “I’m (blank), but only when (blank).”
Edit: I found another great article making a similar point. Check it out.