E
EmilyAlexandra
Guest
It’s an interesting question is all I can say. I live in a country where contraception can be funded by national government, local government, charities, or private health insurance, or you can just pay for your own as and when you need it. E.g., the pill and more complicated arrangements like the coil are provided free at the point of delivery by the NHS; condoms used to be provided universally by the NHS, generally through services funded at local level, but are now mostly available only to young people; condoms are also provided by charities; you can buy oral contraception on the internet for about £6 per month (with a prescription). Therefore, I have not spent a lot of time thinking about this.
However, you are missing my original point. My point was that people get up in arms because companies exercise their right to choose what kind of materials they are prepared to publish on their platforms, but that people, often the very same people, also get up in arms when the government tries to interfere in the affairs of companies that wish to exercise a right not to fund certain kinds of healthcare. You cannot have it both ways: if you think YouTube etc are in the wrong because they suspend an organisation from using their service, surely you must also think that other companies are in the wrong when they similarly take a stand for their own beliefs, such as being against contraception.
